Mr. Ambien Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 We need to seriously be careful about our politics getting as divisive as **** down there is. I mean, Indiana just went from extreme court ruling to extreme legislation. Where is the middleground here? Police officers both need to be able to lawfully enter a home, sometimes without simply showing a warrant (exigent circumstances, for example), at the same time there needs protection from abuse. One shouldn't simply wait for an officer to break and enter and murder someone to understand officers are humans and can be just as much an illegal threat to someone's safety and property as anyone else, given the desire to commit such a crime obviously exists, even if rare. Consider that someone who constitutes an exigent circumstance either has committed a crime in clear sight, is being pursued for a serious offence, is a threat of escaping custody or fleeing officers lawfully in pursuit, and so on, an officer logically doesn't and shouldn't need a warrant. No one reasonable is going to suggest that an officer got what was coming to him if he's pursuing such an obvious threat and got shot. On the other hand, if he merely suspects something, maybe cruising by and sees some pot growing in a window sill, then decides to break in and investigate himself without seeking a warrant, he should logically be considered breaking and entering, not performing duties of a peace officer, and according to certain lax laws liable to be shot if considered a threat by people in the house. Unfortunately there's no pre-emptive way to tell in a logical sense whether or not the entry is legal, a person perceiving an officer as a threat and killing them is risky business, and there's sometimes going to be no way to tell until afterwards whether or not the entry for them was legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Columbo Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 The National Rifle Association lobbied for the new law Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SukhKular Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 How the intruder makes a living is irrelevant. If I can't break and enter, why should a police officer. Don't take this as I'm a cop-hater or anything. I'm in the process of becoming one. It's common sense. Why should my being a police officer exclude me from having to obey the law? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Columbo Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 How the intruder makes a living is irrelevant. If I can't break and enter, why should a police officer. Don't take this as I'm a cop-hater or anything. I'm in the process of becoming one. It's common sense. Why should my being a police officer exclude me from having to obey the law? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armada Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 This is going to be taken wrong by some homeowners.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 But why deadly force? Like for cops, the use of deadly force should be limited to life and death situations not just someone unlawfully trespassing on your property. Someone will die because of this law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satan's Evil Twin Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 We need to seriously be careful about our politics getting as divisive as **** down there is. I mean, Indiana just went from extreme court ruling to extreme legislation. Where is the middleground here? Police officers both need to be able to lawfully enter a home, sometimes without simply showing a warrant (exigent circumstances, for example), at the same time there needs protection from abuse. One shouldn't simply wait for an officer to break and enter and murder someone to understand officers are humans and can be just as much an illegal threat to someone's safety and property as anyone else, given the desire to commit such a crime obviously exists, even if rare. Consider that someone who constitutes an exigent circumstance either has committed a crime in clear sight, is being pursued for a serious offence, is a threat of escaping custody or fleeing officers lawfully in pursuit, and so on, an officer logically doesn't and shouldn't need a warrant. No one reasonable is going to suggest that an officer got what was coming to him if he's pursuing such an obvious threat and got shot. On the other hand, if he merely suspects something, maybe cruising by and sees some pot growing in a window sill, then decides to break in and investigate himself without seeking a warrant, he should logically be considered breaking and entering, not performing duties of a peace officer, and according to certain lax laws liable to be shot if considered a threat by people in the house. Unfortunately there's no pre-emptive way to tell in a logical sense whether or not the entry is legal, a person perceiving an officer as a threat and killing them is risky business, and there's sometimes going to be no way to tell until afterwards whether or not the entry for them was legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefan Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Oh right! Sorry, I got little trigger happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamero89 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 lol The real issue seems to be police abusing their power, fix that. instead in very American fashion they have added a gun element. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.DirtyDangles Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Indiana, not India... vs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darnucks Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 So if the police are chasing some guy and he runs into his friends house, the police follow him in, the bad dudes homeowner friend(s) blows them away as the police enter "illegally". Homeowner is cleared of all charges while his buddy runs away free for another day. Sounds like a brilliant plan, good job Indiana thinking things through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satan's Evil Twin Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 So if the police are chasing some guy and he runs into his friends house, the police follow him in, the bad dudes homeowner friend(s) blows them away as the police enter "illegally". Homeowner is cleared of all charges while his buddy runs away free for another day. Sounds like a brilliant plan, good job Indiana thinking things through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dellins Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Busting into someone's home and spraying bullets at him and potentially children. Wow that must of taken a lot of guts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darnucks Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Hot Pursuit Law & Legal Definition Hot pursuit is pursuit by a law enforcement officer (with or without a warrant) for the purpose of preventing the escape or effecting the arrest of any person who is suspected of committing, or having committed, a misdemeanor or felony. Hot pursuit implies pursuit without unreasonable delay, but need not be immediate pursuit. It can also refer to chasing a suspect or escaped felon into a neighboring jurisdiction in an emergency, without time to alert law enforcement people in that area. http://definitions.u.../h/hot-pursuit/ The beauty of having internet is that we no longer have the luxury of remaining ignorant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tokasmoka Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Sounds like a law we need. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2010/11/03/bc-delta-police-clear-vancouver-police.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satan's Evil Twin Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Still with the bravado in the last part :/ Of course you're free to speak you're mind, call 'em pigs all you want, there certainly are some that deserve the title... considering your post and the context of the thread topic, to some it could look like you're labelling them all as pigs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langdon Algur Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 a warrant is presented before entering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dellins Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 It was a joke. =/ Didn't you see that one thread of mine commending an officer? T'was a good one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darnucks Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 It was a joke. =/ Didn't you see that one thread of mine commending an officer? T'was a good one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Here's the problem with the law. A cop enters a home with a legal permit. The homeowner gets pissed because he hates cops (probably because he is a criminal). The homeowner remembers hearing about this law and, being the idiot that he is, thinks it's ok to now shoot the cop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.