• 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:
In turtles world the citizen should break out a 50 caliber and just blow him into one inch chunks and he would be his hero.

Tell ya this, they pass a law like that...there will be alot of citizens paying the price...because every cop will stop at the curb...until they change that law...Cops are NOT required to go to work and die and get hurt for stupid chit...they die at time doing their job and they all accept thats a possiblity...but to have morons pass a law like this...not my function.

Law Enforcement Line of Duty Deaths in 2012 ...I looked for the Lawyer down website but it was porn site and I couldnt post it
Click to expand...

I honestly think some law enforcement officials get an adrenaline rush from searches using no-knock warrants. They are rarely needed.

Most of these suspect could be arrested outside of their homes/apartments with less risk to innocent individuals.
 
lpast said:
Nope nada not...no knock warrants are for the officer safety and to assure evidence isnt disposed off...no cop in thier right mind is going to knock and allow them to lock and load inside and blow their brains out as they go through the door one at a time...lol...seriously
Click to expand...
They are a dual edged sword. If a criminal's residence is "no knocked" they are going to be pretty sure it's the police, they know they have a chance of being on the radar. On the bad edge of that, a property owner not in violation of the law is going to justifiably be a quite rattled by a door getting busted off the hinges and people running into the domicile.
 
Mya said:
What's the next step ??????? You are able to shoot a police when they poke their heads inside your car window????????? :roll::roll::roll:
Click to expand...

Unlawful is the key....
 
lpast said:
LMAOoooooooooooooooooooooooo...ok this has gotten way beyond absurd im out of here...have fun with the bashing...lol incredible
Click to expand...
Not absurd at all. An officer must have some probable cause to stop a vehicle. You can't pull someone over because you want to see if they are breaking any laws.
 
lpast said:
Nope nada not...no knock warrants are for the officer safety and to assure evidence isnt disposed off...no cop in thier right mind is going to knock and allow them to lock and load inside and blow their brains out as they go through the door one at a time...lol...seriously
Click to expand...

You don't understand what I am saying. They stake out the residence and surprise the suspect as he approaches his parked car.
 
LaMidRighter said:
If they pull you over without probable cause why not? Stopping you just to look for something is not within their scope of powers.
Click to expand...

Forgetting about the scope of powers... are you saying if the police did make a mistake by intruding into your car because of suspicious activity , you would then be prepare to shoot?

don't be ridiculous!
 
Mya said:
Forgetting about the scope of powers... are you saying if the police did make a mistake by intruding into your car because of suspicious activity , you would then be prepare to shoot?

don't be ridiculous!
Click to expand...
If someone just starts looking through my vehicle and doesn't have the courtesy of telling me why they will be assumed an assailant. If an officer explains the situation such as matches a description and he needs answers, or if I have a violation such as a burned out light, crossed a line, or anything that fits probable cause he will get the fullest of cooperation. I believe in being a good citizen, but not a victim.
 
Mya said:
Forgetting about the scope of powers... are you saying if the police did make a mistake by intruding into your car because of suspicious activity , you would then be prepare to shoot?

don't be ridiculous!
Click to expand...

If someone was at my door, I would use common sense. But I have to tell 'ya, if THIS guy is at my door, I am gonna shoot him full of holes without asking any questions at all:

 
danarhea said:
If someone was at my door, I would use common sense. But I have to tell 'ya, if THIS guy is at my door, I am gonna shoot him full of holes without asking any questions at all:

Click to expand...
You mean Batman, or Adam West?
 
danarhea said:
If someone was at my door, I would use common sense. But I have to tell 'ya, if THIS guy is at my door, I am gonna shoot him full of holes without asking any questions at all:

Click to expand...




Bless your heart :roll:
 
Mya said:
Forgetting about the scope of powers... are you saying if the police did make a mistake by intruding into your car because of suspicious activity , you would then be prepare to shoot?

don't be ridiculous!
Click to expand...
I think a reasonable person would give a cop the benefit of the doubt when the cop appears to be acting in good faith, even if it turns out that the cop was in the wrong.
 
Mya said:
Forgetting about the scope of powers... are you saying if the police did make a mistake by intruding into your car because of suspicious activity , you would then be prepare to shoot?

don't be ridiculous!
Click to expand...


. "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 the force is reasonably necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person." A cursory vehicle stop does not seem to fit within these parameters.
 
Wiseone said:
By the populace you mean yourself and other like-minded individuals? After all, there would be no need to oust if elections could solve these problems for you? I wonder why the minority are always so loud in their opinion that they speak for the whole, personally I believe its because they know they truly don't speak for everyone.
Click to expand...
By populace I mean populace:

pop·u·lace
noun
1.
the common people of a community, nation, etc., as distinguished from the higher classes.
2.
all the inhabitants of a place; population.

This is all very nice rhetoric, but its just a perspective.
Click to expand...
The rhetoric about the social contract I stated? It's actually a huge part of American history.

Even you admit that from a pragmatic and realistic perspective that police are different than normal citizens
Click to expand...
All I said is that their authority is granted by the people, and when they breach the social contract with the people, they reap what they've sown.

hell you listed yourself several reasons why in your opinion. Heck you dismiss the high speed cash exactly not by citing law, but by citing that its stupid and reckless in your opinion, not something we are arguing.
Click to expand...
I dismissed it because you brought it up.

All I am saying, is that under the current laws police have special privileges that ordinary citizens do not have. You may not agree with these laws or what police do, but these laws do exist which give police special authorities and powers where ordinary citizens do not have them, that's all I'm saying.
Click to expand...

That's the problem. Police are ordinary citizens. The only "special" citizens are elected officials. Even when I was in the Army, I never viewed myself as being above the US citizenry, because I wasn't. I enlisted into service to protect them, and the Constitution. The key word their is bolded, because it's a very important distinction. I, just like cops are, was paid by the taxpayer. My job that everyone in the US paid me to do was to protect them. Not harm, not beat, or arrest, nor kill them. I was at the service of the United States, not the other way around. The same applies to cops. Some get it, that's cool, I got no beef with those ones. The ones that don't, **** 'em. They get what they get, because actions have consequences, and karma is a bitch.
 
Mya said:
What's the next step ??????? You are able to shoot a police when they poke their heads inside your car window????????? :roll::roll::roll:
Click to expand...
I wouldn't shoot any other person who stuck their head in my window, so no.
 
Connery said:
. "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 the force is reasonably necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person." A cursory vehicle stop does not seem to fit within these parameters.
Click to expand...

Thats a good thing I sure hope its not Connery...Id hate to have cops make vehicle stops and unstrap and hold and walk up to the drivers window and not see any hands and get nervous knowing the law says he could shoot you so you just shoot first...:) hey we can have shootouts all over indiana...everyone that hates cops can say I thought he was going to invade my property so I shot him...and cops will run around shooting all the citizens first...loolol...oh man...I needed this thread tonight...THANK YOU MYA...lol
 
Connery said:
. "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 the force is reasonably necessary to prevent serious bodily injury to the person or a third person." A cursory vehicle stop does not seem to fit within these parameters.
Click to expand...



What I said is what next????

The next logical step would something like that.
 
lpast said:
Thats a good thing I sure hope its not Connery...Id hate to have cops make vehicle stops and unstrap and hold and walk up to the drivers window and not see any hands and get nervous knowing the law says he could shoot you so you just shoot first...:) hey we can have shootouts all over indiana...everyone that hates cops can say I thought he was going to invade my property so I shot him...and cops will run around shooting all the citizens first...loolol...oh man...I needed this thread tonight...THANK YOU MYA...lol
Click to expand...

Again the key is reasonable.....
 
Mya said:
What I said is what next????

The next logical step would something like that.
Click to expand...

What do you mean "what next"....
 
I'm a big supporter of the 2A. I carry just about everywhere I go, I advocate CCW holders to be able to carry onto any school property, and imo the 2A extends to fully-automatic non-crew-served machine guns such as the M249 or MK90.

As a law abiding citizen, I'm on the cop's side by default. If a cop pulls me over or enters my home, I'm automatically going to assume he has just cause to do what he's doing and I'm going to cooperate. We're on the same side.

Should red flags start going up, such as no warrant, I'm not going to just shoot him. Cops don't always need a warrant and it's always safe to assume that I don't have all the information.

To bring me to the point where I would pull my weapon on a cop, I would have to be pushed pretty far. It would have to be a grave and ugly situation. I would have to be in the same state of reasonable fear it would take for me to pull my issued weapon on a fellow soldier, and you would have to push me pretty far for that.

I'm fairly certain that I would allow the cop to commit a certain level of crime against me and then call my lawyer afterwords, instead of pulling a gun. The same is not true were the criminal just a common thug.

Should I ever be pushed that far, should the situation ever become so dire that I feel the application of lethal force against a cop is justified, there shouldn't be a special law keeping me from defending myself. I agree with this law.
 
Last edited:
Connery said:
What do you mean "what next"....
Click to expand...

what we are talking about Connery, first resident in Indiana shoot police who enter their homes ...what next
 
Mya said:
what we are talking about Connery, first resident in Indiana shoot police who enter their homes ...what next
Click to expand...
The law does not stand for one free shot at the cops, I showwed the qualifiers in a previous post.



(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
 
Well..I think this a stupid Law.
 
Mya said:
what we are talking about Connery, first resident in Indiana shoot police who enter their homes ...what next
Click to expand...
I don't know that anything is 'next'. I suppose that decision would be left entirely up to whomever wanted to commit a crime.
 
Mya said:
Well..I think this a stupid Law.
Click to expand...

I am with you Mya....:mrgreen:

There was no need for this is the 4th Amendment was followed to begin with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom