It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by sdcigarpig
Having read the article, that caused this ruling to come around, the following can be stated:
Based off of what we know to be true and the facts of the case, a review is needed:
A husband and wife were arguing outside in the publics eye, and the police were called in to investigate the potential domestic violence and disturbance of the peace. They arrived and the argument had ended. As per the laws of the state that the Police are sworn to uphold, they would have to check out both parties. (As in many cases, the one without marks goes to jail for the night and detained for investigation.) The person in question, who was arrested, ultimately provoked his arrest, as he did lay hands on the police officer, assault and battery. There was no cause for the person to stop the police or not allow them into their house, cause it is in the line of duty, a complaint was filed, and therefore it is up to them to investigate it. But take it down to the lowest common denominator in the case. 2 people were having an argument, out in the publics eye, and by the time the police got there, it had ended and one person was not seen. What would you do or think? Would you take the word of one person, that the other person was alright, or would you investigate to ensure that the person was alright? What if the other person was badly injured or needing medical treatment, or had died or was seriously harmed in a way that would require medical attention, would it be all right? We charge the police to do a duty, and by restricting them from doing their duty will ultimately cause more harm than good. You can not pick and choose what laws to follow, nor should the police pick and choose what laws to enforce. When reading the opinion, there are some points that are there that is not pointed out in the articles. He was charged with disorderly conduct, and it was proved in a court. He was charged with battery, and did not contest it. He was moving out, and it was no longer his home to defend, as he had no legal grounds to block or deny the officers entrance, and the person who legally lived there, did ultimately give permission to enter the home. As there was a domestic disturbance going on, there was sufficient evidence to require the police to respond and check out. When the facts of the case come out, it is very clear that what the articles point out and the facts are often 2 separate things.
Originally posted by CobraCommander
reply to post by Doublemint
The police are not special. Just like the apologist in this thread said, they are just like you and me. You have every right to shoot and kill an intruder in most states. Or at the very least, in EVERY state you have the right to block an intruder. Without a warrant or probable cause, the police are every bit as much an intruder as anyone else. This changes that. This makes the police "special" flying in the face of everything this country has ever stood for. It makes you a second-rate citizen who must bow to the whims of an officer without question.
I am suddenly reminded of a clip from an old movie I grew up watching. A movie that made me proud to be an American. To life in a country where we would never have to put up with something like this...
(Jump to about halfway into the clip)
"Talkin' 'bout an officer, I could charge you for that!"edit on 14-5-2011 by CobraCommander because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Vitchilo
Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home
(visit the link for the full news article)
Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.
In a 3-2 decision, 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.