• 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!

New Indiana gun law allows residents to shoot police

Status
Not open for further replies.
lpast said:
Seriously guys...bash cops all you want, doesnt bother me in the least really, Ive been retired a long time and ive been through the ups and downs and Ive been through all the arguments about how ALL cops suck and ALL cops abuse power and la dee dah dee dah...and you cant tell people with that mentality to go research how many 911 calls there are in one year...how m any arrests are made in one year, how many people saved in one year and crimes prevented, then count the mistakes and abuses of power and excessive use of force...and they would be so minimal compared to the whole picture you would be shocked...but you read 2, 3, 5, 10 stories all blown out of proportion and conclude cops suck...most cops that you read about that are ACCUSED or abuses...never get convicted by jury trials

So have at it..lol
Click to expand...

Hey, some of my best friends are cops. Don't look at me.
 
lpast said:
Seriously guys...bash cops all you want, doesnt bother me in the least really, Ive been retired a long time and ive been through the ups and downs and Ive been through all the arguments about how ALL cops suck and ALL cops abuse power and la dee dah dee dah...and you cant tell people with that mentality to go research how many 911 calls there are in one year...how m any arrests are made in one year, how many people saved in one year and crimes prevented, then count the mistakes and abuses of power and excessive use of force...and they would be so minimal compared to the whole picture you would be shocked...but you read 2, 3, 5, 10 stories all blown out of proportion and conclude cops suck...most cops that you read about that are ACCUSED or abuses...never get convicted by jury trials

So have at it..lol
Click to expand...

Most cops are good people. Most prosecutors are honest and seek justice. Most homeowners aren't going to be victimized by corrupt, stupid or lazy cops being driven by dishonest or nefarious prosecutors. But when it happens, the victims ought to be able to kill in defense
 
lpast said:
Seriously guys...bash cops all you want, doesnt bother me in the least really, Ive been retired a long time and ive been through the ups and downs and Ive been through all the arguments about how ALL cops suck and ALL cops abuse power and la dee dah dee dah...and you cant tell people with that mentality to go research how many 911 calls there are in one year...how m any arrests are made in one year, how many people saved in one year and crimes prevented, then count the mistakes or abuses of power and excessive use of force...and they would be so minimal compared to the whole picture you would be shocked...but you read 2, 3, 5, 10 storie all blown out of proporition and conclude cops suck...most cops that you read about that are ACCUSED or abuses...never get convicted by JURIES decisions.

So have at it..lol
Click to expand...
I'm not bashing police as a whole. Most officers are very professional, do their best to uphold their duties, and it's a thankless occupation. I have a major problem with the minority of bad officers who think that the badge gives them some kind of power over the citizenry. The no-knock warrant is fine in certain circumstances such as violent parole violators, drug crimes in heavily armed structures, etc. but if I have unpaid parking tickets or no prior history of flight, violence, etc. for god's sake just knock on the door and be polite, I promise to be civil.

The other thing is, for a breach please double check an address. Or get a warrant, not unreasonable requests.
 
LaMidRighter said:
It's amazing how tough those jackbooted thugs are when they have large numbers and weapons not allowed to their prey. Every one of those agents deserved a slug to the face.
Click to expand...


Better yet.... abolish the Police Force altogether and let the cannibals take over! how about that huh?:roll:
 
I think that encouraging more violence between police and regular citizens is a bad idea. Both sides (and they really shouldn't be viewed as different sides in the first place) should be slower to use their weapons, not quicker.
 
Mya said:
Better yet.... abolish the Police Force altogether and let the cannibals take over! how about that huh?:roll:
Click to expand...
Not what I'm saying. The particular story TD linked to was a severe abuse of police powers, they came in to a house for harrassment with an overbroad warrant and acted worse than just about any criminal you could imagine. Those particular agents didn't deserve their positions and certainly didn't deserve to leave that raid above room temperature.
 
LaMidRighter said:
Any citizen can make an arrest, they just have to hold for police to process. That is not a special priveledge, even for the operations of surveillence, evidence gathering, or detainment officers still have laws they must follow, such as obtaining a warrant unless there is a compelling reason to act or if a crime is within plain view.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I mean, a normal citizen cannot acquire a warrant. Or in the case of arresting, I mean the full act of a normal arrest by a police officer. It you were to handcuff someone, force them into your vehicle, etc you could be potentially charged with kidnapping, a officer would not if he followed the laws that apply to his actions. If a normal citizen committed the same action, even if he followed the rules that apply to police officers it would not matter because he's not a cop.

Many places have an emergency maximum speed, and these speeds are only allowed under specific circumstances. However, in an emergency most civilian use of speed is dismissed in a court of law. It's not a truly special authority power. Police have a slightly larger scope of protection, but only when their authority is not exceeded.
Click to expand...

I said chase, not emergency speeding. For example you see a reckless driver and decide to chase after him to force him off the road to prevent an accident, that would be illegal. However rushing your wife to the hospital because she's about to give birth is an entirely different situation.

And just to be clear, I would not support charging a citizen who shot a police officer who wrongfully entered his home, even by accident, if he truly thought his life was at risk. It would be a horrible situation and a tragic accident, however the situation being what it is would justify his actions because as far as the shooter knew it was an intruder. I was just making a point that police officers aren't exactly normal citizens given their status.
 
Mya said:
Better yet.... abolish the Police Force altogether and let the cannibals take over! how about that huh?:roll:
Click to expand...

I think you'd see lots of cannibals hanging from trees if that were to happen. cops often PROTECT scumbags from the righteous
 
LaMidRighter said:
Not what I'm saying. The particular story TD linked to was a severe abuse of police powers, they came in to a house for harrassment with an overbroad warrant and acted worse than just about any criminal you could imagine. Those particular agents didn't deserve their positions and certainly didn't deserve to leave that raid above room temperature.
Click to expand...


They are castrating the Police in Indiana. that's all they are doing.
 
Mya said:
They are castrating the Police in Indiana. that's all they are doing.
Click to expand...

Not at all. 99% of police work is not involved
 
TurtleDude said:
I think you'd see lots of cannibals hanging from trees if that were to happen. cops often PROTECT scumbags from the righteous
Click to expand...


I respect the Police.
 
LaMidRighter said:
I'm not bashing police as a whole. Most officers are very professional, do their best to uphold their duties, and it's a thankless occupation. I have a major problem with the minority of bad officers who think that the badge gives them some kind of power over the citizenry. The no-knock warrant is fine in certain circumstances such as violent parole violators, drug crimes in heavily armed structures, etc. but if I have unpaid parking tickets or no prior history of flight, violence, etc. for god's sake just knock on the door and be polite, I promise to be civil.


The other thing is, for a breach please double check an address. Or get a warrant, not unreasonable requests.
Click to expand...


Theres bad everything ...theres bad lawyers that cause people to do prison times...be them overzealous prosecutors or lazy ass CDLs
Theres bad doctors that kill people...and the list just goes on and on....of course theres bad cops of course some cops do bad things.
Im not going to get into a long thing here...when theres a raid..all the supvs involved are called into a command center and briefed by brass.
The street cops are not involved with the briefing...those supv come out of the briefing and give the cops direction...on how its going down.
Those cops are givin the address...theres alot of reasons bad address's come out...sometimes that is what they believe is the right address and it was based on bad information..sometimes the direct supv on the scene just screws the hell up and sometimes the cops running into multi unit tenement go to the wrong door...but they are MISTAKES...not intentional breachs of anyones rights...its not abuse of power...its a MISTAKE a terrible one yes...but a mistake none the less...
 
Wiseone said:
They are not the same as any other citizen, the law provides them with certain privileges that allow them to do things which are otherwise illegal for other citizens, for example to make an arrest or to enter into a high speed chase without being charged with reckless driving themselves. Its similar to laws which grant Soldiers the ability to do certain things that other citizens cannot do, for example fight and kill in nation's wars.

Of course, cops still must have within the boundaries of the law but they are treated slightly differently.
Click to expand...

Like hell they aren't. Citizens actually do have the right to detain others, or halt crimes in progress, and the US is the only country I know of that still does high speed chases, because it's a stupid and reckless policy that creates an even greater hazard to others. One thing I noticed when I came back to my hometown is that the cop cars here no longer have the decals saying "To Serve and Protect", because that's not what they're about. They're all for violating every portion of the Bill of Rights that they possibly can by tear gassing protestors the mayor doesn't like, enforcing gun laws that infringe on our 2nd amendment rights. They illegally search and seize property when the "suspect" is of weak enough character to be intimidated by a badge and so on. They oppress the People of the United States, and stand for everything we fought against to become a nation.

Authority is not granted, it is a contract between the populace, and those in positions of authority. If those in positions of authority abuse their power, the populace is well within their rights to not only reject, but oust the offending party, since the offending party has breached their end of the bargain. When you act like the right hand of tyranny against the citizens of the United States, you have breached that contract, and reap every consequence you have coming, and that's what this law is.
 
Mya said:
I respect the Police.
Click to expand...

so do I but when they rape, castration is in order. I was a prosecutor for a fair amount of time. I worked with cops all the time. and I note again, the vast majority of them are good people
 
It does not appear this bill give the citizens any more rights than they had before: The added language is puffery. Public servant carry's no special privilege when acting in an unlawful manner to begin with nor does this law absolve the citizen from acting within a reasonable manner.

SECTION 1. IC 35-41-3-2, AS AMENDED BY P.L.189-2006, SECTION 1, IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE UPON PASSAGE]:

Sec. 2. (a) In enacting this section, the general assembly finds and declares that it is the policy of this state to recognize the unique character of a citizen's home and to ensure that a citizen feels secure in his or her own home against unlawful intrusion by another individual or a public servant. By reaffirming the long standing right of a citizen to protect his or her home against unlawful intrusion, however, the general assembly does not intend to diminish in any way the other robust self defense rights that citizens of this state have always enjoyed. Accordingly, the general assembly also finds and declares that it is the policy of this state that people have a right to defend themselves and third parties from physical harm and crime. The purpose of this section is to provide the citizens of this state with a lawful means of carrying out this policy.

(i) A person is justified in using reasonable force against a public servant if the person reasonably believes the force is necessary to:
(1) protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force;
(2) prevent or terminate the public servant's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle; or
(3) prevent or terminate the public servant's unlawful trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person's possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person's immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect.

There are limitations, however,

(j) Notwithstanding subsection (i), a person is not justified in using force against a public servant if:
(1) the person is committing or is escaping after the commission of a crime;
(2) the person provokes action by the public servant with intent to cause bodily injury to the public servant;
(3) the person has entered into combat with the public servant or is the initial aggressor, unless the person withdraws from the encounter and communicates to the public servant the intent to do so and the public servant nevertheless continues or threatens to continue unlawful action; or
(4) the person reasonably believes the public servant is:
(A) acting lawfully; or
(B) engaged in the lawful execution of the public servant's official duties.
(k) A person is not justified in using deadly force against a public servant whom the person knows or reasonably should know is a public servant unless:
(1) the person reasonably believes that the public servant is:
(A) acting unlawfully; or
(B) not engaged in the execution of the public servant's official duties; and
(2) the force is reasonably necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person

Enrolled Act, Senate Bill 0001
 
Wiseone said:
Exactly what I mean, a normal citizen cannot acquire a warrant. Or in the case of arresting, I mean the full act of a normal arrest by a police officer. It you were to handcuff someone, force them into your vehicle, etc you could be potentially charged with kidnapping, a officer would not if he followed the laws that apply to his actions. If a normal citizen committed the same action, even if he followed the rules that apply to police officers it would not matter because he's not a cop.
Click to expand...
Normal citizens actually can engage in surveillance, the difference is the evidence cannot be distributed or used in court under most circumstances and if things like recordings or pictures are taken out of plain view and distributed then any unwarranted or unlicensed distribution would be subject to criminal and civil penalties. But it actually isn't outside of citizen authority to gather plain view evidence. I can handcuff someone BTW if they are in the act of committing a crime, the power to charge is what we don't have. Warrants are court issues, we don't need them, but that's simply because it isn't our duty to uphold as citizens. I see your point, we have a slight divergence on the priveledge aspect though.


I said chase, not emergency speeding.
Click to expand...
That really is all a chase is. Using speed to maintain contact.
For example you see a reckless driver and decide to chase after him to force him off the road to prevent an accident, that would be illegal. However rushing your wife to the hospital because she's about to give birth is an entirely different situation.
Click to expand...
Police also must have documentation to use force with a vehicle, they must get advanced permission to PITT, or set spikes, etc. but you are correct in that we cannot break traffic laws to maintain contact.

And just to be clear, I would not support charging a citizen who shot a police officer who wrongfully entered his home, even by accident, if he truly thought his life was at risk. It would be a horrible situation and a tragic accident, however the situation being what it is would justify his actions because as far as the shooter knew it was an intruder. I was just making a point that police officers aren't exactly normal citizens given their status.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Fully agree here.
 
Mya said:
Better yet.... abolish the Police Force altogether and let the cannibals take over! how about that huh?:roll:
Click to expand...

A better solution is to significantly reduce the number of no-knock warrants. Simply stake out the home/apartment and arrest the suspect as he is walking towards his car.
 
Mya said:
was it so hard to say that? :roll:
Click to expand...

not at all and I suspect I have known and worked with far more police officers and law enforcement agents than 99% of the people on this board.
 
Connery said:
It does not appear this bill give the citizens any more rights than they had before: The added language is puffery. Public servant carry's no special privilege when acting in an unlawful manner to begin with nor does this law absolve the citizen from acting within a reasonable manner.

SECTION 1. IC 35-41-3-2, AS AMENDED BY P.L.189-2006, SECTION 1, IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS [EFFECTIVE UPON PASSAGE]:

Sec. 2. (a) In enacting this section, the general assembly finds and declares that it is the policy of this state to recognize the unique character of a citizen's home and to ensure that a citizen feels secure in his or her own home against unlawful intrusion by another individual or a public servant. By reaffirming the long standing right of a citizen to protect his or her home against unlawful intrusion, however, the general assembly does not intend to diminish in any way the other robust self defense rights that citizens of this state have always enjoyed. Accordingly, the general assembly also finds and declares that it is the policy of this state that people have a right to defend themselves and third parties from physical harm and crime. The purpose of this section is to provide the citizens of this state with a lawful means of carrying out this policy.

(i) A person is justified in using reasonable force against a public servant if the person reasonably believes the force is necessary to:
(1) protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force;
(2) prevent or terminate the public servant's unlawful entry of or attack on the person's dwelling, curtilage, or occupied motor vehicle; or
(3) prevent or terminate the public servant's unlawful trespass on or criminal interference with property lawfully in the person's possession, lawfully in possession of a member of the person's immediate family, or belonging to a person whose property the person has authority to protect.

There are limitations, however,

(j) Notwithstanding subsection (i), a person is not justified in using force against a public servant if:
(1) the person is committing or is escaping after the commission of a crime;
(2) the person provokes action by the public servant with intent to cause bodily injury to the public servant;
(3) the person has entered into combat with the public servant or is the initial aggressor, unless the person withdraws from the encounter and communicates to the public servant the intent to do so and the public servant nevertheless continues or threatens to continue unlawful action; or
(4) the person reasonably believes the public servant is:
(A) acting lawfully; or
(B) engaged in the lawful execution of the public servant's official duties.
(k) A person is not justified in using deadly force against a public servant whom the person knows or reasonably should know is a public servant unless:
(1) the person reasonably believes that the public servant is:
(A) acting unlawfully; or
(B) not engaged in the execution of the public servant's official duties; and
(2) the force is reasonably necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person

Enrolled Act, Senate Bill 0001
Click to expand...
That's my instict here. To me it is more of an effort to cofify protection in case something ever went to trial.
 
'Ya know, I am kind of torn on this. On one hand, I believe that people have the right to defend their property, but on the other hand, cops can receive faulty information and then kick down the door to the wrong house through no fault of their own. I'll be honest, if my door is being kicked in I will shoot, but if I have good reason to believe that it is the police kicking down my door, I will do nothing, and will allow them to take me into custody. Any mistakes can then be straightened out.

I don't want to kill someone because of an honest mistake, and I don't want to leave a child without a father.
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
not at all and I suspect I have known and worked with far more police officers and law enforcement agents than 99% of the people on this board.
Click to expand...


so give them a break then!:shrug:
 
Mya said:
They are castrating the Police in Indiana. that's all they are doing.
Click to expand...
I don't see it that way. It appears to be a codified protection for court purposes for any misuse of authority, there is no right to just shoot at will, the property owner must be in the right.

lpast said:
Theres bad everything ...theres bad lawyers that cause people to do prison times...be them overzealous prosecutors or lazy ass CDLs
Theres bad doctors that kill people...and the list just goes on and on....of course theres bad cops of course some cops do bad things.
Im not going to get into a long thing here...when theres a raid..all the supvs involved are called into a command center and briefed by brass.
The street cops are not involved with the briefing...those supv come out of the briefing and give the cops direction...on how its going down.
Those cops are givin the address...theres alot of reasons bad address's come out...sometimes that is what they believe is the right address and it was based on bad information..sometimes the direct supv on the scene just screws the hell up and sometimes the cops running into multi unit tenement go to the wrong door...but they are MISTAKES...not intentional breachs of anyones rights...its not abuse of power...its a MISTAKE a terrible one yes...but a mistake none the less...
Click to expand...
I get that. I'm not saying that a simple mistake should cost an officer his life, but at the same time an officer who gets overzealous and forgets the basic protections on our property, due process, etc. should not have any expectation of safety much like any other violator. However I do understand that sometimes an incorrect address is breached, at that point the police should identify themselves immediately and assess the situation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom