• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

"Why the GOP-backed Indiana Gun Law Is a Terrible Idea"

oldbanger

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2010
Messages
475
Location
beckofbeyond - Idaho
"A new law authorizes citizens to use force against “public servants” (read police officers) whom they reasonably believe to be entering their home illegally.

No one ever really wins a fight with the police, at least not for long. Even if our innocent homeowner manages to shoot a police officer or two and forces the others to retreat, it will only be a matter of time before the police muster additional firepower and resume their efforts, but now with even greater zeal :uhoh:. When a police officer has been shot, his colleagues are unlikely to be deterred by having it pointed out that they are at the wrong house. “Oh, you’re looking for 345 Lilac Circle? I’m afraid this is 347. Sorry about your friend there. Hope he’s up and around soon!”

http://pjmedia.com/blog/gop-backed-indiania-gun-law-is-an-ass/?singlepage=true
 

ManInBlack

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
1,551
Location
SW Idaho
Perhaps the experience of watching a fellow gang member bleed out is exactly what it will take to get the rest of the thugs to take their oaths seriously, and check their behavior accordingly...
 

Superlite27

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
1,277
Location
God's Country, Missouri
It's all a matter of how strongly you adhere to your principles and what you're willing to risk doing it.

The key to resolving this issue in the proper (I didn't say easy) manner is simply training and preparedness.

If you apply yourself dilligently to proficient home defense and prepare accordingly, at some point the police will have to evaluate how many more corpses they wish to "spend" on their misguided attempt to storm the wrong house. (Regardless of their feelings about how the wrong house could become the right house once an officer is injured.)

One would think, with a stack of bodies across the doorsill, an intelligent commander might examine how many more officers he wishes to add to the pile before sending more to illegally enter your residence regardless of how bad he wishes to "get the guy shooting back".

It's all a matter of training and preparedness.
 

Daylen

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
2,223
Location
America
What is just as important is the need to strip the police of any immunity for murdering someone in such a situation.
 

F350

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2012
Messages
941
Location
The High Plains of Wyoming
just like in Missouri (my prior location) the police arrested and the prosecutor prosecuted a man for illegal possession of firearms while intoxicated because he was drunk in his own home which had firearms.

So the legislature acted..... You can now be falling down drunk in the middle of town while armed; and as long as you don't do something "stupid" with your weapon there is no firearms violation.

Police excesses bred legislative counter action. If Indiana hadn't experienced police excess the legislature would not have enacted this law.

Now to the article; the author is a typical @ that takes a situation to an extream and illogical conclusion. In his situation the police knocked and announced a search warrant FIRST then waited before breaking down the door. As in most laws reasonableness is included, in this situation no "reasonable" person would assume the police action to be illegal. Now IF they had broken down the door and announced while entering then a resident may well assume other than police were entering and may well be justified in shooting. Plus the suspect had been seen entering both apartments, the resident on the non target apartment HAD to know illegal activity was taking place and could reasonably expect a visit from the police.
 
Last edited:

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
Criminals should NEVER be protected from the lawful self-defense actions of law-abiding citizens. And just because a criminal might also be wearing badges should not put them in a "protected class".

If this law were enacted in all 50 states, AND applied to the US Code so that it applied to Federal officers as well, perhaps LEOs would think twice before pressing forward with dubious, dicey, or outright illegal raids, searches, and detainments...

When your decision-making process could put your life on the line, your decisions tend to be MUCH more thoroughly considered, and better planned out.

Just sayin'...
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Criminals should NEVER be protected from the lawful self-defense actions of law-abiding citizens. And just because a criminal might also be wearing badges should not put them in a "protected class".

If this law were enacted in all 50 states, AND applied to the US Code so that it applied to Federal officers as well, perhaps LEOs would think twice before pressing forward with dubious, dicey, or outright illegal raids, searches, and detainments...

When your decision-making process could put your life on the line, your decisions tend to be MUCH more thoroughly considered, and better planned out.

Just sayin'...

+1
 

Deanimator

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
2,083
Location
Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
It's a "terrible" idea because now when the police screw up, it's dangerous for THEM, and that's simply unacceptable.

The underlying concept of opposition to the law is that it ONLY matters if the COP goes home safely. If he negligently blows a teenage girl in half with a shotgun at the WRONG address, "no harm, no foul". This law really messes with that.
 

Deanimator

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
2,083
Location
Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
In addition, we need a law which mandates the death penalty for ANY LEO who through fraud or deceit obtains a search or arrest warrant, and anyone is subsequently killed as a result of the service of said warrant.

That would both deter crimes like the murder of Kathryn Johnston by the Atlanta PD, and ensure that the men who murdered her don't get the kind of sweetheart deals that ensure that they're back on the streets as a threat to the community.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
What is just as important is the need to strip the police of any immunity for murdering someone in such a situation.

+1.

If I can ascertain they're police (as opposed to criminals) before they unlawfully enter my abode, I'll lay down, as I'm not out to gun down the police, no matter how ignorant they may be.

On the other hand, if I can't ascertain the ones who're unlawfully entering my home are cops, then they're going to die, and I really hate the idea of them getting away with murder simply because they're "the law."

They are NOT the law. They're servants of the people.
 

mpguy

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Messages
689
Location
Suffolk Virginia
It's a "terrible" idea because now when the police screw up, it's dangerous for THEM, and that's simply unacceptable.

The underlying concept of opposition to the law is that it ONLY matters if the COP goes home safely. If he negligently blows a teenage girl in half with a shotgun at the WRONG address, "no harm, no foul". This law really messes with that.

I disagree with respect. What if my daughter was in mid reach of a toy when the cop blows down the door? All the cop sees is a kid reaching, and out of instinct pulls the trigger. It happens. If the police want safety for the officers they employ...do the paper work properly.

Just be noted, i have a lot of repsect for peace officers.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
 

Deanimator

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
2,083
Location
Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
I disagree with respect. What if my daughter was in mid reach of a toy when the cop blows down the door? All the cop sees is a kid reaching, and out of instinct pulls the trigger. It happens. If the police want safety for the officers they employ...do the paper work properly.

Just be noted, i have a lot of repsect for peace officers.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
I presume you were being sarcastic.

I have less respect for them every day... due entirely to their own words and deeds and their "circle the wagons" attitude toward even the most shocking crimes committed by other cops.
 

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
The following map illustrates why so many LEOs and politicians see this new law in Indiana as a bad idea.

They are afraid that stupid, inept, and criminal LEOs will be lawfully killed by law-abiding citizens who are victims of their terrorism...

http://www.cato.org/raidmap/
 

KYGlockster

Activist Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2010
Messages
1,842
Location
Ashland, KY
I believe this law is excellent, although it should be unnecessary. Our 4th amendment right should be enough to protect us from this nonsense, however it seems the Supreme Court of Indiana disagrees. I find it odd how all these news outlets believe just because someone has a badge that they must be a good person. Apparently they haven't researched the statistics of criminal officers, they are rather shocking. Cops kill more innocent people every year than regular citizens, and there are less than a million officers. Even gun magazines make officers out to be all do-gooders, like when they mention the carry of firearms by cops and "law-abidding citizens." Why don't they put law-abidding before "cops" as well? I fully support this legislation, and believe this abuse of authority on the behalf of law enforcement has gone on for far too long. The people of Indiana should be grateful that they have a legislature that respects their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and their right to be free from illegal searches and seizures.
 

tcmech

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2009
Messages
368
Location
, ,
I have no reason for the police to kick in my door, I have nothing illegal in my home, I have committed no crimes, if someone were to kick in my door with their best all black swap meet clothing that said police, and their cute little neck chain badge wallets I could only think that it was someone impersonating the police and performing a home invasion robbery.

In the case that I was downstairs and could not get to my larger artillery I go with the failure drill, two center of mass, one center of cranium. If I am where I can reach that browning chambered in 300wm I only have one question, what was that level of body armor again?

The fourth amendment protects us from unlawful search and seizure, if a law enforcement officer kicks in the wrong door it is not an accident, it is a crime. If a civilian instead of a law enforcement officer were to do this that is how the courts would view it.
 

William Fisher

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2011
Messages
238
Location
Oxford, Ohio
I have no reason for the police to kick in my door, I have nothing illegal in my home, I have committed no crimes, if someone were to kick in my door with their best all black swap meet clothing that said police, and their cute little neck chain badge wallets I could only think that it was someone impersonating the police and performing a home invasion robbery.

In the case that I was downstairs and could not get to my larger artillery I go with the failure drill, two center of mass, one center of cranium. If I am where I can reach that browning chambered in 300wm I only have one question, what was that level of body armor again?

The fourth amendment protects us from unlawful search and seizure, if a law enforcement officer kicks in the wrong door it is not an accident, it is a crime. If a civilian instead of a law enforcement officer were to do this that is how the courts would view it.

Exactly. There are some people (And I know this is a far reach) who have the ability and money to set up an honest LEO. If his or her door were to be kicked in at 3 O'Clock in the morning, I hope they would assume that it was a Home Invasion Team. I hope they would want to protect Spouse, Children and other family members in the home and act accordingly. If they didn't, I would call them STUPID. I'm not envolved in anything illeagal and if my door gets kicked in at 3 O'Clock in the morning it is an Home Invasion Team. I would rather be judged by twelve than carried by six.
 
Last edited:
Top