Hoosiers Have No Right To Resist Unlawful Entry Of Their Homes

[Lil Red]

[url="http://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/14/indiana-supreme-court-rules-hoosiers-have-no-right-to-resist-unlawful-entry-of-their-homes-by-police/"]From Hot Air[/url]

[quote]In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home [i]for any reason or no reason at all[/i], a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer’s entry. [emphasis mine][/quote]

[quote]“We believe … a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence,” David said. “We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest.”

David said a person arrested following an unlawful entry by police still can be released on bail and has plenty of opportunities to protest the illegal entry through the court system.[/quote]

from the article by Bruce McQuain at HotAir:

[quote]One has to wonder what part of “unlawful” Justice David doesn’t get. What part of the right of the people to “be secure… shall not be violated” wasn’t taught to him in law school.

How secure is anyone in their “persons, houses, papers and effects” if, per David, a police officer can waltz into any home he wants to “for any reason or no reason at all?”

The given reason by the Justice is resistance is “against public policy?” What policy is that? For whatever reason, most believe our public policy as regards our homes is set by the 4th amendment to the US Constitution. Since when does Indiana’s “public policy” abrogate the Constitutional right to be “secure in our persons, houses, papers and effects”?

Additionally, most would assume it is the job of the police not to “escalate the level of violence”, not the homeowner. Like maybe a polite knock on a door to attempt an arrest instead of a battering ram and the violent entry of a full SWAT team to arrest a suspected perpetrator of a non-violent crime. Maybe a little pre-raid intelligence gathering, or snagging the alleged perp when he leaves the house to go to work, or walk the dog, or go to the store.

Now citizens in Indiana are to give up their 4th Amendment rights because it might “elevate the violence” if they attempt to protect themselves from unlawful activity? Sounds like the “don’t resist rape” nonsense that was once so popular.[/quote]

[Don John of Austria]

O
I read about this saturday. Indiana, so nice of it to go full tyranny isn't it.

[MagiDragon]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' timestamp='1305564894' post='2242332']
O
I read about this saturday. Indiana, so nice of it to go full tyranny isn't it.
[/quote]

We Hoosiers have probably elected the antithesis of this croutons, yet the courts still force it on us.

[cmotherofpirl]

I'm assuming the ACLU and the Supreme Court will fix this.

[mcts]

So we have this, but we just got some amesome anti-abortion laws. No good deed goes unpunished.

[Winchester]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1305654608' post='2242852']
I'm assuming the ACLU and the Supreme Court will fix this.
[/quote]
Unless it's about guns, which the A"CL"U thinks are reserved to government ownership. I hate the ACLU.

[Groo the Wanderer]

[img]http://www.politifake.org/image/political/small/1011/aclu-tsa-groping-pat-down-aclu-political-poster-1290393302.jpg[/img]

[The Shover Robot]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1305654608' post='2242852']
I'm assuming the ACLU and the Supreme Court will fix this.
[/quote]

Don't be so sure.

http://www.toledoblade.com/Editorials/2011/05/22/Fourth-Amendment-folly.html

[Norseman82]

Go to page 33, line 23 of the following sentencing document:

http://www.vince-testa.net/index_files/Sentencing.pdf

Whether or not the defendant has an anger problem is not the point, but the statement that you can't show a paper warrant because of the "sheer volume" strkes me as "sorry, it's too inconvenient for us to follow the Constitution".

[4588686]

It's almost like unlawful police entries are supposed to be sorted out in the courts or something.



What am I saying! If any citizen even feels like the police entering their house might be illegal they should just mow those fudgers down the second they cross the doorway.

Edited May 28, 2011 by Hasan

[dairygirl4u2c]

there's all kinds of warrant exceptions, that the supreme court and long tradition has said is permissible. 'probable cause' etc etc. if that's not asking for trouble,when people can attack the police, i dont know what standard would

[AudreyGrace]

Sounds a lot like [i]King v Kentucky[/i], but that case dealt more with exigent circumstances.