deadly force authorized against police in Indiana

[crash]

I always had more fun as a 3yr old in a toy store. Pull the stick out of your ass, lawyerboy, the world will be more fun for you too.

[cladking]

I always had more fun as a 3yr old in a toy store. Pull the stick out of your ass, lawyerboy, the world will be more fun for you too.

Oh!!!

I love lawyers. They are the best of people.

(except when they are the worst)

[Disciple]

I always had more fun as a 3yr old in a toy store. Pull the stick out of your ass, lawyerboy, the world will be more fun for you too.

You don't have to be a lawyer to figure this out. I'm just someone who knows how to think, Google and copy and paste.

Get an adult to dumb it down for you.

Or wait for the Best In Children's Books version.

[crash]

Try again. It's still in there..

[username]

Part II

It was primarily written in response to an incident where a police officer was moonlighting as a home invader, stealing televisions and other electronics equipment from homes where he had responded to calls. As previously written, the law did not allow for individuals to shoot this police officer even though he was off duty, out of uniform, and committing home intrusion, circumstances under which any other person could be legally shot."

So a law was written to address an unusual scenario where one police officer was moonlighting as a home invader? Do we really need a law which might have a billion loopholes in it and cause undue harm to legitimate LE to address a case where a cop went rogue? Does anyone else see that as ludicrous?

That's fucking stupid.

[Riotgear]

Do we really need a law which might have a billion loopholes in it and cause undue harm to legitimate LE

Yes. Because we don't want that law to feel lonely hanging around all the other laws that don't make sense.

[Disciple]

Part II

It was primarily written in response to an incident where a police officer was moonlighting as a home invader, stealing televisions and other electronics equipment from homes where he had responded to calls. As previously written, the law did not allow for individuals to shoot this police officer even though he was off duty, out of uniform, and committing home intrusion, circumstances under which any other person could be legally shot."

So a law was written to address an unusual scenario where one police officer was moonlighting as a home invader? Do we really need a law which might have a billion loopholes in it and cause undue harm to legitimate LE to address a case where a cop went rogue? Does anyone else see that as ludicrous?

That's fucking stupid

Ludicrous to refuse to forfeit your right to defend yourself against ANYONE who wants to rob, assault, rape or murder you in your home?

If you say so .....

[username]

Part II

It was primarily written in response to an incident where a police officer was moonlighting as a home invader, stealing televisions and other electronics equipment from homes where he had responded to calls. As previously written, the law did not allow for individuals to shoot this police officer even though he was off duty, out of uniform, and committing home intrusion, circumstances under which any other person could be legally shot."

So a law was written to address an unusual scenario where one police officer was moonlighting as a home invader? Do we really need a law which might have a billion loopholes in it and cause undue harm to legitimate LE to address a case where a cop went rogue? Does anyone else see that as ludicrous?

That's fucking stupid

Ludicrous to refuse to forfeit your right to defend yourself against ANYONE who wants to rob, assault, rape or murder you in your home?

If you say so .....

Again, I say do we need to legislate this?

[username]

We're talking about LE here. Everyone has the right to defend themselves but not to shoot LE doing their job.

[Lady Cop]

Disciple: Ludicrous to refuse to forfeit your right to defend yourself against ANYONE who wants to rob, assault, rape or murder you in your home?


that is NOT the topic. the topic is shooting the police who may have cause to enter.

this isn't about 'stand your ground'.

[Disciple]

Disciple: Ludicrous to refuse to forfeit your right to defend yourself against ANYONE who wants to rob, assault, rape or murder you in your home?


that is NOT the topic. the topic is shooting the police who may have cause to enter.

this isn't about 'stand your ground'.

With respect, LC, it only applies to police ILLEGALLY in your home.

The law makes clear that police there legally who announce themselves (even with no knock warrants) are not included.

I submit that this IS about defending yourself and your home.

From ANYONE.

[Duchess]

This is very convoluted to me.

[Lady Cop]

THIS is the topic title:

deadly force authorized against police in Indiana.

nowhere in this thread does it discuss stand your ground against 'ANYONE'.