Ind. Gov signs bill allowing deadly force against Cops.

I agree with this completely. This will be a significant check against the militarization of police, no-knock raids, and other Gestapo tactics that have been so popular lately, and have created significant disconnect between the police and the people they are trying to protect. I would say that the police can show that their entry is legal by knocking on the door and showing their warrant. If they do that, the homeowner won't be able to shoot them legally.

 

So the same people who are against mandated verbal warnings now essentially want cops to read aloud the warrant or be killed?

 

Just make sure there is no one else to tell their side of the story.

 

Here's a less biased discussion of the law:

http://www.indystar.com/article/201...iana-police-fear-state-s-new-right-resist-law

Seems it's a reaction to a court ruling that said you had no right to resist a police officer in your home. It's an attempt to define when you do have the right to resist, and what you have to do first -- including trying to withdraw.

But it's very poorly written. And since I'm generally against these Stand Your Ground laws, and absolute Castle Doctrine nonsense, I'm against it. Sue the bastards if you want, but keep your gun holstered. Or better yet -- lets stop encouraging everyone to be packing heat.

 

Seriously, what's to stop a guy from shooting a cop trying to enter his house, and then just claiming in court, "Oh he didn't read the warrant out loud, so I thought it was illegal."

 

I am about as liberal as it gets but gun ownership is constitutionally protected. I agree there should be restrictions on guns (like automatic assault riffles and background checks) but lawful citizens should be able to reasonably defend themselves. Now, how do we define what is reasonable?

 

The map didn't show up right for me, so here's a link: http://www.cato.org/raidmap/

 

That's always been the rub, hasn't it? What's reasonable? I know gun owners who will swear up and down that any restriction on either gun ownership, or use, is out of bounds. I have no doubt that they are applauding this law, even if they haven't read it. Which, in my opinion, is crazy.

 

What's the best way to make sure cops check their warrants and obey the Constitution---

OH YEAH, IT'S TO ALLOW ANYONE TO KILL THEM IF THEY SCREW UP.



This will either lead to a lot more smiling when they barge down your door, or a police tank rammed down your throat for a misdemeanor.

Seriously, what kind of bizzaro world is this. Judge, jury, executioner for police officers entering your house?

yeah, this is reinforcing how good the judicial system can be. Why don't we just base American society on Will Smith movies, it's getting there anyways, and I like the Victorian steam style. We can't think of, I don't know, solutions to police abuse of power that don't involve gunfights from the Wild West?

 

I don't think the possibility of being prosecuted for killing a cop was ever the primary deterrant from taking shots at one. I'd think people mostly hesitate because of the high probability that the cop (and all his cop friends) will shoot back.

I will be interested to see if there is ever a homeowner alive long enough to employ this legal defense.

 

No... It means that she would have been able to shoot and kill one of the agents, and then her and her child would have been sprayed with bullets from agents thinking they are under attack from a perpetrator.... yup, that will end well..... a dead agent, a dead mother, a dead child, a dead dog and maybe no friendly fire deaths....

Yeah... this law has win/win written all over it.......

 

The effect of this won't be Wild West-style gunfights. It will be more discretion by the police.

 

Right, knowing people might be armed, and ready to kill them will lead to "discretion", smiles, and good paperwork, as opposed to, you know, the current judicial and legislative framework we have, which could enforce this without resorting to the threat of Wild West gunfights.

 

Why don't they pass the Dexter Morgan law and get it over with. What judicial system? Life isn't worth anything anyways, well, at least not cops who are ordered to your house and don't serve you the right papers.

You should be able to kill anyone that you have ever suspected of doing any wrong-doing to you, even if the equivalent offense under the judicial system is a slap on the wrist. We went from assault being a judge, jury, executioner case to cops ordered to your house, so why not extend that to say, poor fashion sense, or bad writing. It would make our lives a hell of a lot more fun.

 

The current judicial framework is what allows the epidemic of no-knock raids and innocent civilians and their dogs being killed by cops. This is an attempt to roll that back slightly.

 

Actually police do need to get warrants to search someone's house...
But that's not the point.
We all know SOME cops are douchebags, but giving people the notion that they can shoot cops for "illegally entering" their homes is just plain stupid.
This is as stupid as the stand your ground crap in Florida.

 

Right, by threatening a gunfight.

No one can think of rational solutions like enforcing the Fourth Amendment properly. The presence of guns solve everything. In a society, if everyone is armed, trust between the police and the people they protect is oh so well demonstrated.

 

I hope you are joking...