Hold your ground and castle law in simple terms please

[GuyRelford]

now what about the Indiana Supreme Court ruling that made it against the law for Indiana residents to protect themselves from anyone who kicks in the door to your home and screams police and has a badge? .......even if they aren't the cops.....

The case you're talking about, Barnes v. State, didn't say that.

Guy

 

[jamesg]

I thought the "N Word" was an offensive term until I watched the first 30 seconds of one of these videos? Then I realized it is used in a similar fashion to the word "the".

good thing you stopped at the first 30 seconds, i just clicked through a few minutes of it and i may have to order a second gun now.....

 

[jamesg]

The case you're talking about, Barnes v. State, didn't say that.

Guy

you have no way of knowing if they are the cops or not, and in that split second, do you choose to defend or "ask for ID please" and then "file a complaint after the fact"

what happens if perps kick in your door, flashing fake badges, misrepresenting themselves, and you follow the law, which says you cannot resist?

 

[WC Deer Hunter]

good thing you stopped at the first 30 seconds, i just clicked through a few minutes of it and i may have to order a second gun now.....

Careful you might start sounding like a paranoid gun toting fanatic.

 

[griffin]

The case you're talking about, Barnes v. State, didn't say that.

This is a correct statement. However, I think the poster may have been inferring that you can't always tell a real no-knock raid from a home invasion, particularly if you are innocent and would never suspect a real LEO no-knock raid on your house.

As you are well aware, many of us--including you, I suspect--can cite cases where LEOs killed innocent people where either they had the wrong house or had bad info (informer just made something up) or who knows what?

The point is, how do you know if you are the subject of a real LEO no-knock warrant or a home invasion where you will get murdered? Perhaps no-knock warrants should be illegal. They are not legal in MI. (Supposedly, although some PDs still perform them. Detroit being one).

 

[jamesg]

This is a correct statement. However, I think the poster may have been inferring that you can't always tell a real no-knock raid from a home invasion, particularly if you are innocent and would never suspect a real LEO no-knock raid on your house.

As you are well aware, many of us--including you, I suspect--can cite cases where LEOs killed innocent people where either they had the wrong house or had bad info (informer just made something up) or who knows what?

The point is, how do you know if you are the subject of a real LEO no-knock warrant or a home invasion where you will get murdered? Perhaps no-knock warrants should be illegal. They are not legal in MI. (Supposedly, although some PDs still perform them. Detroit being one).

precisely, that ruling opened up the door for perps to present themselves as cops and take the chance the person on the receiving end follows the law and will not resist

 

[GuyRelford]

you have no way of knowing if they are the cops or not, and in that split second, do you choose to defend or "ask for ID please" and then "file a complaint after the fact"

what happens if perps kick in your door, flashing fake badges, misrepresenting themselves, and you follow the law, which says you cannot resist?

I understand the problem, and I've commented extensively on the negative ramifications of the case. I'm just saying that the decision did not say that it's illegal to defend yourself against a police imposter.

Guy

 

[WC Deer Hunter]

This is a correct statement. However, I think the poster may have been inferring that you can't always tell a real no-knock raid from a home invasion, particularly if you are innocent and would never suspect a real LEO no-knock raid on your house.

As you are well aware, many of us--including you, I suspect--can cite cases where LEOs killed innocent people where either they had the wrong house or had bad info (informer just made something up) or who knows what?

The point is, how do you know if you are the subject of a real LEO no-knock warrant or a home invasion where you will get murdered? Perhaps no-knock warrants should be illegal. They are not legal in MI. (Supposedly, although some PDs still perform them. Detroit being one).

Their is actually a bill in process right now trying to reverse that decision. Well maybe not reverse it but make a law basically rendering the verdict illegal. That's my understanding anyway.

 

[jamesg]

I understand the problem, and I've commented extensively on the negative ramifications of the case. I'm just saying that the decision did not say that it's illegal to defend yourself against a police imposter.

Guy

it may as well have said that because that's exactly what it allows. what's going to happen if you kill a cop because you felt he was an imposter? you can no longer hold your ground based on that ruling...., it flies in the face of the castle doctrine

perhaps there is a thread dedicated to this topic, i am sure there is/was, but i think it is relevant when discussing castle doctrine issues in Indiana no?

i know if i were going to do a home invasion, i would be yelling "cops!!" on my way in, giving me the edge, and the law abiding citizen is in worse shape for following the law

 

[GuyRelford]

Their is actually a bill in process right now trying to reverse that decision. Well maybe not reverse it but make a law basically rendering the verdict illegal. That's my understanding anyway.

Not quite. The Barnes decision invited the legislature to take action if it wanted to allow physical resistance of an illegal police entry into a person's home. Senate Bill 0001 is accepting that invitation to some degree, carving out some limted exceptions to the Supreme Court's stated rule in Barnes that you can't resist an illegal police entry.

Guy

 

[GuyRelford]

i know if i were going to do a home invasion, i would be yelling "cops!!" on my way in, giving me the edge, and the law abiding citizen is in worse shape for following the law

I've said exactly the same thing on several different threads, so you're arguing with the wrong guy. But there's nothing in the Barnes case that says if you shoot a police imposter in a situation where the Castle Doctrine allows the use of deadly force that you're going to jail.

The problem, obviously, is being able to tell an imposter from a real LEO. I understand that that's your point - and I've made the same point several times myself.

Guy

 

[jamesg]

I've said exactly the same thing on several different threads, so you're arguing with the wrong guy. But there's nothing in the Barnes case that says if you shoot a police imposter in a situation where the Castle Doctrine allows the use of deadly force that you're going to jail.

The problem, obviously, is being able to tell an imposter from a real LEO. I understand that that's your point - and I've made the same point several times myself.

Guy

we were never arguing, only bolstering what we both obviously know to be true