• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NRA-Backed Law Spells Out When Indianans May Open Fire on Police

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,707
Reaction score
6,264
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
this may be considered old news, but i think the law discussed in the article is still relevent enough to discuss.


NRA-Backed Law Spells Out When Indianans May Open Fire on Police - Bloomberg

Every time police Sergeant Joseph Hubbard stops a speeder or serves a search warrant, he says he worries suspects assume they can open fire -- without breaking the law.

Hubbard, a 17-year veteran of the police department in Jeffersonville, Indiana, says his apprehension stems from a state law approved this year that allows residents to use deadly force in response to the “unlawful intrusion” by a “public servant” to protect themselves and others, or their property.

“If I pull over a car and I walk up to it and the guy shoots me, he’s going to say, ‘Well, he was trying to illegally enter my property,’” said Hubbard, 40, who is president of Jeffersonville Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 100. “Somebody is going get away with killing a cop because of this law.” Indiana is the first U.S. state to specifically allow force against officers, according to the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys in Washington, which represents and supports prosecutors. The National Rifle Association pushed for the law, saying an unfavorable court decision made the need clear and that it would allow homeowners to defend themselves during a violent, unjustified attack. Police lobbied against it.

The NRA, a membership group that says it’s widely recognized as a “major political force” and as the country’s “foremost defender” of Second Amendment rights, has worked to spread permissive gun laws around the country. Among them is the Stand Your Ground self-defense measure in Florida, which generated nationwide controversy after the Feb. 26 shooting of Trayvon Martin, an unarmed Florida teenager.

Asked about the Indiana law, Andrew Arulanandam, a spokesman for the Fairfax, Virginia-based association, said he would look into the matter. He didn’t return subsequent calls.

The measure was approved by the Republican-controlled Legislature and signed by Republican Governor Mitch Daniels in March. It amended a 2006 so-called Castle Doctrine bill that allows deadly force to stop illegal entry into a home or car.

The law describes the ability to use force to “protect the person or a third person from what the person reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful force.”

Republican state Senator R. Michael Young, the bill’s author, said there haven’t been any cases in which suspects have used the law to justify shooting police.

He said “public servant” was added to clarify the law after a state Supreme Court ruling last year that “there is no right to reasonably resist unlawful entry by police officers.” The case was based on a man charged with assaulting an officer during a domestic-violence call.

Young cited a hypothetical situation of a homeowner returning to see an officer raping his daughter or wife. Under the court’s ruling, the homeowner could not touch the officer and only file a lawsuit later, he said. Young said he devised the idea for the law after the court ruling.

“There are bad legislators,” Young said. “There are bad clergy, bad doctors, bad teachers, and it’s these officers that we’re concerned about that when they act outside their scope and duty that the individual ought to have a right to protect themselves.”

Bill supporters tried to accommodate police by adding specific requirements that might justify force, and by replacing “law enforcement officer” in the original version with “public servant,” said Republican state Representative Jud McMillin, the House sponsor.

Now before people start criticizing me, allow me to state my reason for posting this story. before she became a lawyer, my mother served as a police officer in Wisconsin, so i am concerned about laws that may potentially harm police officers for no justifiable reason.

can any of the pro-gun people on this forum give me a better understanding of what you think of this kind of law?
 

CalGun

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
7,039
Reaction score
3,268
Location
Denio Junction
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
I'm curious; if a police officer is trying to kill you and you have given him no reason to do so, should you just die or would it be prudent to defend yourself?
 

American

Bier Meister
Bartender
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
89,616
Reaction score
28,477
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
The sargeant begins with the premise that people are looking for a reason to shoot him, and now they have a law to support it. This is insane. What person, besides someone that is already willing to shoot a police officer would even attempt to take advantage of it? Most people I know do not wish to shoot an officer, and would probably still hesitate even after realizing that an officer is trying to harm them.
 

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,707
Reaction score
6,264
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The sargeant begins with the premise that people are looking for a reason to shoot him, and now they have a law to support it. This is insane. What person, besides someone that is already willing to shoot a police officer would even attempt to take advantage of it? Most people I know do not wish to shoot an officer, and would probably still hesitate even after realizing that an officer is trying to harm them.

i guess there are some opponents of the bill who think that this bill will potential create more legal headaches and will make police officers jobs more complicated then it has to be.
 

American

Bier Meister
Bartender
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
89,616
Reaction score
28,477
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Communist
i guess there are some opponents of the bill who think that this bill will potential create more legal headaches and will make police officers jobs more complicated then it has to be.

Why don't wait till it has created legal headaches?
 

CanadaJohn

Canadian Conservative
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 27, 2013
Messages
28,732
Reaction score
20,428
Location
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I'm curious; if a police officer is trying to kill you and you have given him no reason to do so, should you just die or would it be prudent to defend yourself?

I have to say that reason tells me that if you get into a gun fight with a police officer, you're going to lose - either to that police officer or to one of the hundreds of his colleagues who are going to hunt you down. Even if you voluntarily surrender, chances are pretty good you're not making it to the police station alive or at least not conscious.

That said, it seems that this law will put in harms way people such as children's aid officers, by-law enforcement officers, meter readers, etc. Only a matter of time before some fool shoots and kills some innocent civil servant for no good reason thinking they could.
 

CRUE CAB

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
16,763
Reaction score
4,343
Location
Melbourne Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Little over blown because it is supposed to shield people from wrongful or mistaken address warrants.
Say you live at 150 Peach and the warrant is for 150 Peachtree and the police get the wrong home to kick the door in on.
Which does happen, but pretty rarely.
 

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,707
Reaction score
6,264
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Little over blown because it is supposed to shield people from wrongful or mistaken address warrants.
Say you live at 150 Peach and the warrant is for 150 Peachtree and the police get the wrong home to kick the door in on.
Which does happen, but pretty rarely.

so police make mistakes, don't we all make mistakes at some time or another?

surely a explination or a simple conversation could fix the mix-up?
 

CRUE CAB

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
16,763
Reaction score
4,343
Location
Melbourne Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
so police make mistakes, don't we all make mistakes at some time or another?

surely a explination or a simple conversation could fix the mix-up?
Welp, once someone kicks my door in. Its on. I have the same training and equipment as well.
It would be a blood bath that I may not live through, but I am not dropping to my knees just because someone is yelling "police".
The police need to do a better job of getting the right place more than I need to do a better job preparing for them.
 

Unitedwestand13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
20,707
Reaction score
6,264
Location
Sunnyvale California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Welp, once someone kicks my door in. Its on. I have the same training and equipment as well.
It would be a blood bath that I may not live through, but I am not dropping to my knees just because someone is yelling "police".
The police need to do a better job of getting the right place more than I need to do a better job preparing for them.

a misunderstanding does not need to end in a bloodbath.
 

BretJ

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2012
Messages
6,457
Reaction score
2,533
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
a misunderstanding does not need to end in a bloodbath.

Very true. So the onus is on the civil servants to perform due diligence prior to serving a no knock arrest warrant to ensure they do not cause a misunderstanding which would cause an innocent person to use force to protect themselves. Why is the onus on an innocent person to determine who just busted their door down? The civil serveants are the supposed professionals and are ultimatley responsible for ensuring the safety of innocent citizens first, themselves second.
 

CRUE CAB

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
16,763
Reaction score
4,343
Location
Melbourne Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
no, and i don't intend to do anything to provoke someone in law enforcement.

Like I said, its for when they get the wrong house.
Say you are asleep, and your door gets kicked? You just going to lay there because someone is yelling police?
Anyone can fake being a cop to get you handcuffed then rob you, and I would say thats probably happend more than the real police getting the wrong address.
 

CRUE CAB

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
16,763
Reaction score
4,343
Location
Melbourne Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Very true. So the onus is on the civil servants to perform due diligence prior to serving a no knock arrest warrant to ensure they do not cause an innocent person to use force to protect themselves. Why is the onus on an innocent person to determine who just busted their door down? The civil serveants are the supposed professionals and are ultimatley responsible for ensuring the safety of their innocent citizens first, themselves second.
Nailed it, end thread.
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
this may be considered old news, but i think the law discussed in the article is still relevent enough to discuss.


NRA-Backed Law Spells Out When Indianans May Open Fire on Police - Bloomberg



Now before people start criticizing me, allow me to state my reason for posting this story. before she became a lawyer, my mother served as a police officer in Wisconsin, so i am concerned about laws that may potentially harm police officers for no justifiable reason.

can any of the pro-gun people on this forum give me a better understanding of what you think of this kind of law?
Pretty simple. If an officer is operating in an illegal capacity the citizen has a right to self defense and the officer forfeits legal protection. This of course is only during the commission of the act, Louisiana has had a similar "no protection zone" for officers acting against constitutional protections, engaging in unlawful arrest/detainment, or commission of a violent act for quite some time.
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
The sargeant begins with the premise that people are looking for a reason to shoot him, and now they have a law to support it. This is insane. What person, besides someone that is already willing to shoot a police officer would even attempt to take advantage of it? Most people I know do not wish to shoot an officer, and would probably still hesitate even after realizing that an officer is trying to harm them.
I don't wish to shoot anyone, but no one should mistake that for passivity. If an officer asks entrance into my house sure, if he demands it he'd better produce a warrant, short of that any engagement by him will end in a fatality.
 

CRUE CAB

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
16,763
Reaction score
4,343
Location
Melbourne Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The sargeant begins with the premise that people are looking for a reason to shoot him, and now they have a law to support it. This is insane. What person, besides someone that is already willing to shoot a police officer would even attempt to take advantage of it? Most people I know do not wish to shoot an officer, and would probably still hesitate even after realizing that an officer is trying to harm them.
Then he needs to start looking for another job.
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I have to say that reason tells me that if you get into a gun fight with a police officer, you're going to lose - either to that police officer or to one of the hundreds of his colleagues who are going to hunt you down. Even if you voluntarily surrender, chances are pretty good you're not making it to the police station alive or at least not conscious.

That said, it seems that this law will put in harms way people such as children's aid officers, by-law enforcement officers, meter readers, etc. Only a matter of time before some fool shoots and kills some innocent civil servant for no good reason thinking they could.
Not necessarily, they can't break any laws trying to get payback for their colleague acting in bad faith, any further crimes they commit they will be held responsible for and they know it.
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
so police make mistakes, don't we all make mistakes at some time or another?

surely a explination or a simple conversation could fix the mix-up?
Someone kicks my door down unexpectedly I'm not asking questions.
 

CRUE CAB

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
16,763
Reaction score
4,343
Location
Melbourne Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Not necessarily, they can't break any laws trying to get payback for their colleague acting in bad faith, any further crimes they commit they will be held responsible for and they know it.
You have to remember, guys like John think that just because they are police they are crack shots. Same with criminals, all the antigunners think if you produce a gun to defend life and home, it will be taken from you and used on you by crimnals who are crack shots.
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
You have to remember, guys like John think that just because they are police they are crack shots. Same with criminals, all the antigunners think if you produce a gun to defend life and home, it will be taken from you and used on you by crimnals who are crack shots.
CJ is one of the good guys, he doesn't have experience with firearms but respects the right. Cops are all over the place when it comes to weapons proficiency but tend to be lackluster when compared to private citizens. Most criminals are laughably bad shots.
 

CRUE CAB

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
16,763
Reaction score
4,343
Location
Melbourne Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Someone kicks my door down unexpectedly I'm not asking questions.

I was wondering how that was going to work myself.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ, BAM!!!!!!!! door slams open, door frame tears out of the concrete, three or four dudes all dressed in black with ski maskes start pouring in.
Um, "excuse me sir. May I see some ID and inquire as to why you are in my home pointing a M4 at my wifes head?" Oh, that will get you tazed in a second, now you are at someone elses complete mercy as are your children. Dog barks, shot if its aggressive.
Now you are face down on your carpet, zip tied from behind, gagged if you keep talking, tazed if you try to get up, knee to the middle of the back by the heaviest cop you ever saw bound in body armor and full gear adding about 40 more pounds of guns, ammo and mags.
Then they go, "oh damn wrong house". But they will find some dope. Oh, you dont smoke dope? Well 4 cops are going to testify that they found a baggie of dope under your bed.
Yes, it happens just like this.
 

CRUE CAB

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
16,763
Reaction score
4,343
Location
Melbourne Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
CJ is one of the good guys, he doesn't have experience with firearms but respects the right. Cops are all over the place when it comes to weapons proficiency but tend to be lackluster when compared to private citizens. Most criminals are laughably bad shots.
I shoot with some cops, and yea they are like most groups of people. Fair to real good. I dont shoot with criminals so I dont really know.
 
Top Bottom