Posted on 06/06/2012 5:12:04 AM PDT by marktwain
June 5 (Bloomberg) -- Every time police Sergeant Joseph Hubbard stops a speeder or serves a search warrant, he says he worries suspects assume they can open fire -- without breaking the law.
Hubbard, a 17-year veteran of the police department in Jeffersonville, Indiana, says his apprehension stems from a state law approved this year that allows residents to use deadly force in response to the "unlawful intrusion" by a "public servant" to protect themselves and others, or their property.
"If I pull over a car and I walk up to it and the guy shoots me, he's going to say, 'Well, he was trying to illegally enter my property,'" said Hubbard, 40, who is president of Jeffersonville Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 100. "Somebody is going get away with killing a cop because of this law."
Indiana is the first U.S. state to specifically allow force against officers, according to the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys in Washington, which represents and supports prosecutors. The National Rifle Association pushed for the law, saying an unfavorable court decision made the need clear and that it would allow homeowners to defend themselves during a violent, unjustified attack. Police lobbied against it.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
And the DFW area every so often has people in unmarked cars and fake uniforms trying to rob or rape. Yes, the police should be careful, but clearly identify who they are. And they should also be careful because that may be a bad guy behind the wheel. Tis law is clearly a response to very questionable LEO actions.
I'm pretty sure that's the point, asshat. Since the law only applies when the LEO is breaking the law, is it actually your position that even if a LEO is breaking the law, his life shouldn't be at risk -- just because he's a LEO??? Are there so many LEO's out there breaking the law with such frequency that this law will be problematic? And if there are, you think the LAW's the problem??? "If you aren't breaking the law, you have nothing to worry about." -- that's what the statists always say. Reminds me of all the people trashing SYG even though it doesn't apply in the scenario they're complaining about.
The National Rifle Association pushed for the law, saying an unfavorable court decision made the need clear and that it would allow homeowners to defend themselves during a violent, unjustified attack. Police lobbied against it.
"The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail—its roof may shake—the wind may blow through it—the storm may enter—the rain may enter—but the King of England cannot enter!—all his forces dare not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement!" -- Pitt the Elder
I came close to having to kill a cop.
He was stoned out of his gourd.
If he had started shooting he wouldn’t have stopped with me, he would have shot everyone in sight.
I’m like you. I didn’t even consider the uniform.
Luckily my almost breaking his arm was enough to stop him from pulling his gun.
It’s somewhat germane to the thread that Anders Brievik killed scores of people while dressed as a cop.
We must never allow ourselves to develop instinctive deference to uniforms.
Lawless government agents should be worried. That was the intent
Since our police have been nationalized in training by the same people who have declared Americans domestic terrorists and thereby violate our constitutional rights and molest, kill, beat and torture us (and our pets), all of us have been worrying whether we will survive an encounter with police officers and other armed agents of the government.
So now everyone can worry in equality and maybe no one will have to worry as much anymore. A polite society is a safe society.
We’re completely on the same page, Dubh, so please don’t misunderstand. People should NOT be afraid of public servants, even LEOs, and I think this law is acceptable but sad that it had to even be catalogued.
I agree that the police have become militant in their enforcement, making seat belt laws a primary offense, DUI checkpoints, the whole nine. I’ve learned that the police are NOT your friend and would rather close a case with a potential suspect than do the work to find the actual perpetrator. I would never consent to searches and would never open my door for a LEO if they asked.
As far as UPS delivery and mail carrier impersonators, light em up! If perps want to try this route of attack, they’re going to find it less than advantageous as more people open fire on presumed delivery people.
I don’t know about you, but I track everything that’s ever delivered to my home. If I get a knock or a ring at my door and I’m not expecting someone, I will grab my shotgun before answering the door, and I live in a VERY vanilla part of my county.
And as far as your saying “It’s better to be judged by 12 than carried by six,” let me offer another thought on that. I’ve had to use a firearm twice to defend my life, and my lawyer explained it to me a different way:
When you use a firearm to defend yourself, your life is on the line three times: during the initial event, in defense of it; during the incident review with law enforcement, recalling it; and during a jury trial (if it gets to this point), being judged on it. These three things don’t cross the minds of most people, but you have to defend yourself a lot when you defend yourself with deadly force. Just look at Zimmerman.
This law is in direct response to your fellow brothers continually crossing the line between “Protect and Serve” and being Jack Booted Thugs.
Hate to say it but you guys have become more militant over the years and take way to many “Roids”.
Yes, we do need a law to protect pets.
We need a Federal law defining domestic terrorist as Islamic jihadists ONLY. We need a law banning Federalized training of local and state police and we need constitutional standards taught to local and state police. We need to make sure the elitists obey the law and do not involve the US military in domestic law enforcement. We need to have our borders protected and stem the flow of foreign invaders.
As opposed to the citizens worrying about being the police randomly arresting citizenss without sufficient cause http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2891732/posts
"When the government fears the citizens this is freedom. When the citizens fear the government this is tyranny."
If someone breaks into your home and identifies himself as a police officer your actually going to place the lives of your family on the line.
It seems,I recall a number of times where people who identified themselves as police broke into the homes of people during the night and killed the families there.
If the Law Enforcement Community wants to stop this they will go in marked vehicles and in uniform and make sure they raid the right property.Its called research.
The police cannot afford to screw up because it’s not only their safety that matters.Its also the safety of the public.
Unless he's a thug with a gun and a badge, I don't see why Sgt. Hubbard would be worried. Perhaps he's just pissy because he missed out on the opportunity to beat up old ladies and take their guns during the Hurricane Katrina aftermath.
...or maybe it's been a while since he shot a vicious Pomeranian.
We agree on those points, pups. Unfortunately the courts side with law enforcement in an overwhelming subset of incidents. If a ne’er-do-well cop breaks down your door outside of protocol because they suspect illegal activity, they’re fired upon by the occupants, and they kill those occupants, regardless of the actual situation, those cops are sworn and thus trusted by the State to tell the truth. They’ll talk with their law enforcement buddies who respond, get a good cover story established, and if it ever goes to court, the “record” will speak for the events.
Forcibly entering an occupied residence used to be a capital offense in several states. This should be universal common law. A person's home is their castle.
Of course, surviving invaders of such incursions should be provided affirmative defense in cases where active gunfire is coming from such invaded premises.
Otherwise, anyone forcibly entering an occupied residence is subject to instant termination, without regard to their attire or paperwork.
Good. I want you worried; maybe you'll follow the law.
You are a servant of the public, not the state and should be afraid of us.
Amen. If they can't knock on the door and wait for a response like civilized people, they need to seek another line of work.
Fortunately, many people have come to the conclusion that the police are not their friends, and that 'testilying' is SOP these days. If I were on a jury the tesimony of any police officer without video to back it up will be sharply discounted to the point of being almost worthless.
Hm, have you seen footage of police abuses of late? It's disgusting, also note that not all injuries are physical; case in point: the TSA. Thanks to them we now have a huge precedence to not only warrantless searches but to searches without even probable cause. Such is extremely injurous precisely because it erodes Constitutionally guaranteed rights, sending the government from a law-based organization to a might-based organization. (Though they cover that last bit up with legal sounding language and dances.)
"It's not clear under the law whether an officer acting in good faith could be legally shot for mistakenly kicking down the wrong door to serve a warrant, said state Senator Tim Lanane, the assistant Democratic leader and an attorney."
If the police knew this, they might check the address 2 or 3 times before they kicked in a door, or maybe just knock first. This is not a new issue - the prevelance of "Castle laws" make this inevitable.
In Clay County, Indiana, outside Terre Haute, the Sheriff's Department changed its procedures because of the law. Detectives in plain clothes and unmarked cars now must be accompanied by a uniformed officer on calls to homes, Sheriff Michael Heaton said.
Ahhhhh .... an intended consequence of the law.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.