Indiana Law lets you defend yourself from police

[Savage Jav]

The Indiana law that lets citizens shoot cops

The Hoosier State now allows people to use deadly force to keep public servants from illegally entering their homes or cars. Police, of course, are not pleased

theweek.com

Curious peoples thoughts, have a feeling itll be split. I agree a way to prevent no knock raids, or makes the police get a warrant. Keeps them honest.

Read More

 

[po18guy]

Even with a warrant? Even under exigent circumstances? With an invitation? Those are the only ways they ever could enter.

Well, society has to collapse sooner or later, so might as well be sooner.

 

[Savage Jav]

Even with a warrant? Even under exigent circumstances? With an invitation? Those are the only ways they ever could enter.

Well, society has to collapse sooner or later, so might as well be sooner.

Its to cover the defendant for when they are found not guilty on all counts the DA cant charge them with shooting an officer

 

[Yarome]

I have to admit I'm 50-50. I'm a LE supporter, but then again, there have been far too many times in the news over the years of LEO's making bad calls, abuses of authority and innocent citizens ending up dead while officers largely enjoy immunity.

It seems only fair that citizens should have the same immunity when defending themselves in a castle doctrine state.

I understand that any law can be abused though and somewhat agree with LE concerns about officers being killed unjustly and the perp getting away with it, but isn't that what happens when LEO's kill someone unjustly too??

All in all... I guess I do go along with the idea of having an "even playing field". LEO or civilian abiding by the same rules and having the same protections.

 

[ma96782]

Q : How do the citizens protect themselves from rogue/tyrannical Politicians who make Unconsitutional (or even unjust) Laws?

WAIT, Wait, wait......
Don't answer that.

Aloha, Mark

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

I fail to see any way this is a problem

It authorizes people to protect themselves or their property by using deadly force in response to "unlawful intrusion" by a "public servant."

Because the other choice would seem to be that "public servants" are above the law and can do as they wish to "people". But I don't know why we are dancing around things by calling them "public servants" Like the man said,
"Nobody ever made a song called Duck the Fire Department"

 

[Knobgoblin]

Obscure movie

 

[Alexx1401]

I like the "idea" but, this does scare me.

 

[RobMa]

View attachment 1340821

Obscure movie

What do you expect with Nicolas Cage being in it?

 

[RobMa]

Actually I like the idea, we're always being told that if you don't want to do the time don't do the crime. This might put a lot of officers who would otherwise be abusive to task and make them realize that they're not gonna walk away scot-free if they're going to bully and potentially kill somebody due to lack of obedience. It won't affect the truly good honest law-enforcement officers that are actually on the job because they really want to help people and be a service to the community.

 

[po18guy]

Q : How do the citizens protect themselves from rogue/tyrannical Politicians who make Unconsitutional (or even unjust) Laws?

WAIT, Wait, wait......
Don't answer that.

Aloha, Mark

I know huh? I have never been raided by police but I am raped 24/7 by unjust laws.

 

[Mark W.]

I'll keep this in mind first time I get to Indiana!

 

[Tony617]

Actually I like the idea, we're always being told that if you don't want to do the time don't do the crime. This might put a lot of officers who would otherwise be abusive to task and make them realize that they're not gonna walk away scot-free if they're going to bully and potentially kill somebody due to lack of obedience. It won't affect the truly good honest law-enforcement officers that are actually on the job because they really want to help people and be a service to the community.

 

[RVTECH]

All in all... I guess I do go along with the idea of having an "even playing field". LEO or civilian abiding by the same rules and having the same protections.

I agree.

After all, Isn't this what is often espoused when the discussion is about guns/weapons LEO carry and how we should be entitled to the same - or that of LEOs being allowed nothing more than what is legal for civilians?

HOWEVER on the 'flip side' I hope the public understands the law, and that it no doubt ONLY applies to the limits of 'unlawful intrusion' to the extent of say no more than that of ANYONE unlawfully entering their homes, cars etc., and not just LEOs.

 

[dangerranger60]

so instead of this why not just put limits on No-Knock warrants? DR

 

[bradsteen]

so instead of this why not just put limits on No-Knock warrants? DR

Shhhhhh, don't say that. People will think you're some kind of right-wing nutjob.

 

[Koda]

so instead of this why not just put limits on No-Knock warrants? DR

both should be done. Sometimes cops get the wrong house and a person has a right to defend their house.

 

[Koda]

I recall reading a story of a person who got pulled over wrongly in a traffic stop. The cop threatened his life, I cant recall the details but the guy shot the cop in self defense and wasnt even charged if I recall correctly.
If I can recall the story I will share a citation.
Short version is if your lifes in danger from a cop they should not be above the law.

 

[RVTECH]

so instead of this why not just put limits on No-Knock warrants? DR

Probably not a bad idea actually, and maybe some limits on other things as well.

At the same time it does seem like a bit of an 'impulsive' decision by the Governor to sign this into law - and maybe somewhat over reactive.

Maybe there are some 'issues' between the Gov and some elements of Indiana Law Enforcement behind the scenes.

 

[RVTECH]

This part of the article is somewhat disturbing and gives me more of a regard for the law being passed.

Why did Indiana push this law?
The state Supreme Court had previously ruled that citizens had no legal right to resist police officers, even in a case of unlawful entry. So before this new law was passed, explains Republican state Sen. Michael Young, people had no legal right to protect themselves from abuse at the hands of authorities.

'Even in a case of unlawful entry' denotes a clear overreach of legal law enforcement action and opens up a plethora of other possibilities of say 'actions' by LEO that could be considered 'acceptable' and not unlawful.