Open UP! This is the poli.......BAM.....unnhh

[IMaDick]

For the sake of argument, how did the law read before this addition? I find it odd that the article prompting this discussion failed to mention ANY group or sponsorship behind the “new” legislation. So why the new law? I’d bet the ONLY difference between what was on the books before and now was a carte blanche shooting of anyone including public officials. Now the culprits need a reason. Where is that expert on Castle Law, sonny223? He’d know.

This is a good question; did a little research. Still don't know the motivation behind this new law signed by Gov. Daniels, but here's some relevant history that I found interesting.

1. Amendment IV of US Constitution - Enacted December of 1791:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Purpose / Problem to be solved:
Abuse of "writ of assistance" requirements for government and military officials to enter private homes during the American Revolution.

2. May of 2011: (Indiana Supreme Court Ruling):
Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer's entry.

"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." Davidfurther stated that other means of resisting (complaint, legal action against an unlawful search... ) was the appropriate solution/resistance.

Purpose / Problem to be solved: To minimize violence if unlawful police entry takes place in a civilian's home (best I can surmise).


3. March of 2012: The new Indiana law (passed by Governor Daniels):
Reverses a state Supreme Court ruling that homeowners do not have the right to use force against law enforcement officials who they believe are illegally entering their homes.

Purpose / Problem to be solved: ??
This is what I don't understand; was unable to find a clear mission statement. Was the 2011 overturned it to take the heat off Indiana government officials because Indiana voters objected to the 2011 as unconstitutional? Was it because Indiana LE was taking advantage of the "no-resist" nature of the 2011 law and entering homes without showing probable cause and obtaining the necessary knock or no-knock warrants?

Now find a way to apply those Constitutional principles to homeland security and you have it made, and while you're at it take a look at the war powers act that was signed on st patricks day and see if you can find a way to justify it based on a war on foreign soil.

I would love to sit close and have a deep serious conversation about life with you sometime.