• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home

How do you prove, as the home owner, that he didn't hear a scream, even though you know he is making it up?

ya, unless you somehow got it on tape you can't. Like that line in training day : "It's not what you know, it's what you can prove."

That's why if someone breaks into your house you shoot them down and then shoot a hole in the ceiling, when the cops show up you tell them warning shot in the ceiling then shooting the criminal.
 
Last edited:
ya, unless you somehow got it on tape you can't. Like that line in training day : "It's not what you know, it's what you can prove."

Which is why some jurisdictions are passing laws prohibiting recording your encounters with law enforcement.
 
[highlight]I don't know of a case offhand where a wrongly-targeted homeowner has shot it out with a police team, mistakenly thinking they were criminals, but it could happen and it is a nightmarish scenario.[/highlight] If it is a case of the cops being at the wrong house, the homeowner (if he survives) should certainly be protected from criminal charges for defending his home against an illegitimate police entry that should never have happened. He or his heirs should be able to seek substantial recompense.
It happened fairly recently in Atlanta. Undercover (plainsclothes) police stormed the house of a 92 year old woman, cutting the bars on her door and breaking it down under a "no-knock" warrant. She was living alone in a bad part of town. She fired a single shot (missing) and was killed when police returned fire.

As it turned out, the raid was illegal. The warrant was obtained using falsified information. The nice officers even went so far as to plant drugs on the premises when it became clear they seriously screwed up. Needless to say, they're all in jail, as they should be.

Of course she never knew any of that. She probably heard what she thought were burglars cutting the bars on her door, and she fired that single bullet after the door came down and about the same time a bunch of guys yelled "police!"

I don't care what the law says, the woman had every right to take that shot. If she had lived, and I were sitting on a jury, I would simply ignore a "no right to resist" law.
 
Which is why some jurisdictions are passing laws prohibiting recording your encounters with law enforcement.

Naturally... corruption protects the corrupt.

Remember that BART shooting? Where the cop "thought" he was pulling out his taser, shot the man through the back killing him... they claimed the surveillance cameras were shut off, and even confiscated people's cell phones, EXCEPT FOR a man who was on a train that filmed the entire event.

What did that cop get for murder???

I think it was 5 years or less.
 
It happened fairly recently in Atlanta. Undercover (plainsclothes) police stormed the house of a 92 year old woman, cutting the bars on her door and breaking it down under a "no-knock" warrant. She was living alone in a bad part of town. She fired a single shot (missing) and was killed when police returned fire.

As it turned out, the raid was illegal. The warrant was obtained using falsified information. The nice officers even went so far as to plant drugs on the premises when it became clear they seriously screwed up. Needless to say, they're all in jail, as they should be.

Of course she never knew any of that. She probably heard what she thought were burglars cutting the bars on her door, and she fired that single bullet after the door came down and about the same time a bunch of guys yelled "police!"

I don't care what the law says, the woman had every right to take that shot. If she had lived, and I were sitting on a jury, I would simply ignore a "no right to resist" law.

Cops never do anything wrong. They're here for your protection. Move along.
 
Thugs with badges outnumber the men who take their police work seriously, and yes, guess what? The Mayor most certainly gets to use the Mayor's own mind to determine if the damn thug with badge is being a dickwad or not.
Oh no you don't. You do not determine that. Your comments are actually very unsettling and frightening, to be quite honest. Your total lack of respect for the men and women who work every day to keep you and your ungrateful self safe is absolutely appalling.

By the way, let me tell you, when police have a reason to go into your home, they have a damn good reason. You will comply, or you will be subdued. Whether that's with a glock or a baton is all up to you. You don't have any authority over the police. If you think it's illegal, you don't make that call. You argue that in a court of law, and if the police did not conduct their duties properly, they will be reprimanded, and your case will be thrown out. That's how justice works. Justice is not you shooting a cop because YOU think they shouldn't be in your house.
 
Oh no you don't. You do not determine that. Your comments are actually very unsettling and frightening, to be quite honest. Your total lack of respect for the men and women who work every day to keep you and your ungrateful self safe is absolutely appalling.

By the way, let me tell you, when police have a reason to go into your home, they have a damn good reason. You will comply, or you will be subdued. Whether that's with a glock or a baton is all up to you. You don't have any authority over the police. If you think it's illegal, you don't make that call. You argue that in a court of law, and if the police did not conduct their duties properly, they will be reprimanded, and your case will be thrown out. That's how justice works. Justice is not you shooting a cop because YOU think they shouldn't be in your house.

In case you missed it, but for the past 153 years the courts have repeatedly ruled that it's not the job of law enforcement to keep you safe. They have ruled that it is your personal responsibility to do so. They have ruled that law enforcement's job is to keep the peace, investigate crimes, and to generally enforce the law. Due to police officers swearing an oath of office to the Constitution of the United States they are duty bound to ignore unjust laws. Do you ignore unjust laws that are repugnant to the Constitution?

The final thing I have to say is that the people have the final say on all power delegated to the government. They determine what is a just law and what is Constitutional. The people in office do not have that authority due to their oaths of office.
 
In case you missed it, but for the past 153 years the courts have repeatedly ruled that it's not the job of law enforcement to keep you safe. They have ruled that it is your personal responsibility to do so. They have ruled that law enforcement's job is to keep the peace, investigate crimes, and to generally enforce the law. Due to police officers swearing an oath of office to the Constitution of the United States they are duty bound to ignore unjust laws. Do you ignore unjust laws that are repugnant to the Constitution?
Who's job is it to determine whether or not a law is against the constitution? The big three thats who. The legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Which includes those branches of either state or federal government or both. Just because YOU (the individual) think that something is constitutional, while not being well versed in constitutional law doesn't mean you do what the hell you want to.
 
It happened fairly recently in Atlanta. Undercover (plainsclothes) police stormed the house of a 92 year old woman, cutting the bars on her door and breaking it down under a "no-knock" warrant. She was living alone in a bad part of town. She fired a single shot (missing) and was killed when police returned fire.

As it turned out, the raid was illegal. The warrant was obtained using falsified information. The nice officers even went so far as to plant drugs on the premises when it became clear they seriously screwed up. Needless to say, they're all in jail, as they should be.

Of course she never knew any of that. She probably heard what she thought were burglars cutting the bars on her door, and she fired that single bullet after the door came down and about the same time a bunch of guys yelled "police!"

I don't care what the law says, the woman had every right to take that shot. If she had lived, and I were sitting on a jury, I would simply ignore a "no right to resist" law.

You have a link for this story? I'd like to read it...You have my attention.
 
ya, unless you somehow got it on tape you can't. Like that line in training day : "It's not what you know, it's what you can prove."

That's why if someone breaks into your house you shoot them down and then shoot a hole in the ceiling, when the cops show up you tell them warning shot in the ceiling then shooting the criminal.

Ahh, the classic use of movie (fictional) scenarios to argue topics of reality.....
 
Who's job is it to determine whether or not a law is against the constitution? The big three thats who. The legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Which includes those branches of either state or federal government or both. Just because YOU (the individual) think that something is constitutional, while not being well versed in constitutional law doesn't mean you do what the hell you want to.

Sorry, but you forgot the fourth branch of government which is the people. It isn't the big three since they're in no position to determine the extent of the powers that were delegated. The Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of your state of residence are quite clear on this since they are limits on government not the people. All of your authority is derived from the consent of the people. Your authority does not extend from the big three. When was the last time you lived up to your oath of office to bear true faith to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of your state? Probably never, since you never comment about how you take stands against unjust laws.
 

I vaguely remember this case now.

What I find interesting is that nobody is bothering to ask the question......Why? Why go through the trouble of lying about information to obtain a warrant to search a home to find some drugs to make an arrest.
No arrest is worth all that....So, why?

Also, this is an obvious example of why "the drug war" is such a waste of time and resources, an example from the local level if you will.
 
I vaguely remember this case now.

What I find interesting is that nobody is bothering to ask the question......Why? Why go through the trouble of lying about information to obtain a warrant to search a home to find some drugs to make an arrest.
No arrest is worth all that....So, why?

Also, this is an obvious example of why "the drug war" is such a waste of time and resources, an example from the local level if you will.

The why doesn't matter to the criminals that wear badges. It's just like no one questions the why when non-police commit crimes. It's not important to most people. However, maybe we should start asking why more often.
 
The why doesn't matter to the criminals that wear badges. It's just like no one questions the why when non-police commit crimes. It's not important to most people. However, maybe we should start asking why more often.

I ask why for EVERY crime..... regardless of who is committing it.
 
I ask why for EVERY crime..... regardless of who is committing it.

Let me know if you come up with any answers. I find that the bulk of crimes that are arrested for are a result of the war on drugs and the war on drugs is the result of institutionalized racism and enforced morality of the minority. It's really funny, yet sad at the same time, that Amnesty International that the United States has far more people imprisoned, a supposedly free county, then communist China, a totalitarian regime.
 
Let me know if you come up with any answers. I find that the bulk of crimes that are arrested for are a result of the war on drugs and the war on drugs is the result of institutionalized racism and enforced morality of the minority. It's really funny, yet sad at the same time, that Amnesty International that the United States has far more people imprisoned, a supposedly free county, then communist China, a totalitarian regime.

Persons imprisoned has nothing to do with how free you are as a society.

Higher Persons imprisoned could mean we are better at investigating and solving crimes against our people.
If you want to stick with the drug angle...
We have a higher demand for illegal drugs coming into the country and are doing a worse job of preventing those drugs from getting in than other countries. This just means we have more junkies and worthless bags of garbage in our society, or we do a worse job of keeping these things from getting into our borders.
We could also use some reform in our drug laws, I would agree, but making lame comparisons to China using quips like "free society" and "Totalitarian Regime" mean absolutely nothing.


You have to be open to ALL viewpoints, not just the one that suits your argument's need.
 
Persons imprisoned has nothing to do with how free you are as a society.

Higher Persons imprisoned could mean we are better at investigating and solving crimes against our people.
If you want to stick with the drug angle...
We have a higher demand for illegal drugs coming into the country and are doing a worse job of preventing those drugs from getting in than other countries. This just means we have more junkies and worthless bags of garbage in our society, or we do a worse job of keeping these things from getting into our borders.
We could also use some reform in our drug laws, I would agree, but making lame comparisons to China using quips like "free society" and "Totalitarian Regime" mean absolutely nothing.


You have to be open to ALL viewpoints, not just the one that suits your argument's need.

Persons imprisoned is a direct correlation to how free a society is. The more people in prison is a result from more legislation making things illegal. Drugs are illegal to protect the paper industry and for racial reasons. Do you support government sponsored racism?

Many of the things that are currently illegal are victimless like drugs. The only reason why other crimes are done in support of the drug trade is because drugs are illegal to begin with. Prohibition of alcohol had the same effect in regards to other crimes stemming from just making alcohol illegal. We all know how well that turned out. Do you realize that there are over 13,000 things that are illegal just under federal law alone? The states have just as many things that are illegal. Now does this make us a free society? Nope, because many activities are illegal which is a restriction on liberty/freedom from state restraint.

Like you said think outside of your viewpoint.
 
Last edited:
Like you said think outside of your viewpoint.

... Yet you didn't.

I showed there are other factors that could be taken into consideration when thinking of persons imprisoned when compared to another nation.
You continued on your viewpoint that the only factor considered is freedom of people to do what they want... and apparently regardless of whether that makes a victim of someone else or not.
 
Hey I have a question.

In what way CAN YOU resist a cops entry into your home? and in that moment?

What are you supposed to do, start shooting at them, that'll go down well.

As long as it doesn't suspend a citizens right to recieve compensation from a illegal/botched entry, this whole thing is kind of redundant.
 
... Yet you didn't.

I showed there are other factors that could be taken into consideration when thinking of persons imprisoned when compared to another nation.
You continued on your viewpoint that the only factor considered is freedom of people to do what they want... and apparently regardless of whether that makes a victim of someone else or not.

Except your viewpoint runs contrary to what the Constitution of the United States actually says. Hence the reason why I discount it combined with the fact that you're part of the government. Of course, you're going to espouse your view because it gives you great power at the expense of the liberty of the people. If you can counter my statement about there are more things illegal and the direct correlation with prison populations combined with diminished liberty I'm all for you to bring it forth, except you haven't done any such thing. You opined that I was wrong in my thinking. An opinion is not fact and cannot be used to counter the facts I presented.
 
I vaguely remember this case now.

What I find interesting is that nobody is bothering to ask the question......Why? Why go through the trouble of lying about information to obtain a warrant to search a home to find some drugs to make an arrest.
No arrest is worth all that....So, why?

Also, this is an obvious example of why "the drug war" is such a waste of time and resources, an example from the local level if you will.

Why? Because they can. I do have a respect for respectable cops, but a surprising number are little better than gangsters with the legitimacy of government.

The drug war might as well be called the war on competing drug cartels.

This is also a symptom of not rebuking the patriot act.
 
Except your viewpoint runs contrary to what the Constitution of the United States actually says. Hence the reason why I discount it combined with the fact that you're part of the government. Of course, you're going to espouse your view because it gives you great power at the expense of the liberty of the people. If you can counter my statement about there are more things illegal and the direct correlation with prison populations combined with diminished liberty I'm all for you to bring it forth, except you haven't done any such thing. You opined that I was wrong in my thinking. An opinion is not fact and cannot be used to counter the facts I presented.

You presented no facts. You presented what is equivalent to, "Wahh Wahh We have more people in prison than China and we are supposed to care about competition for lower persons imprisoned so we need to make more stuff legal and allow more people to commit crimes against others all in the name of reducing the number of people in prison wahh wahh."
 
Why? Because they can. I do have a respect for respectable cops, but a surprising number are little better than gangsters with the legitimacy of government.

The drug war might as well be called the war on competing drug cartels.

This is also a symptom of not rebuking the patriot act.
"Because they can" is the most ignorant response.
There is a reason why these officers would go so far to do all this, and it is a hell of alot more complex than "Because we can".
It is an individual reason, not a "blanket" reason like you just used. There is something specific to this situation that caused these guys to act like this...... just, I can't seem to find that information anywhere because nobody gives a rats ass apparently.
People like to blame a group of individuals personal reasons for becoming corrupt on the entirety maybe? Why find out the reasoning behind it if it takes away from our ability to call all law enforcement "crooked ass pigggzzz"
 
Back
Top Bottom