Smoking Hot New Case on Self-defense in the Home where intruder claims to be Police

[IndySSD]

Excellent ruling! It's nice to see common sense affirmed every once in awhile. Don't force entry into people's homes wrongfully and then wonder why there's a gun pointed in your face. Seems like a self-correcting problem to me.

Sorry read that too fast.... did not compute... error

A problem has been detected and My brain has been shut down to prevent damage.

The problem seems to be caused by the following file :commonsense.cfg

PAGE_FAULT_IN_NONPAGED_AREA

 

[finity]

Excellent decision.

Hopefully this may put the brakes on the trend toward no-knock warrants & storm-trooper like tactics.

 

[88GT]

The bad part is that you're liable to be shot and killed asserting your rights. The ruling doesn't do you a lot of good when you're lying an a pool of your own blood. Nice to see a judge get it right, tho.

If we stopped accepting the idea that law enforcement has complete immunity in its actions, this wouldn't be a problem. If law enforcement quit perpetuating the idea that it somehow has unlimited authority over the citizenry, this wouldn't be a problem. If we punished those who abused their power and authority at the expense of innocent homeowners exercising their right of self defense, this wouldn't be a problem.

 

[mrjarrell]

If we stopped accepting the idea that law enforcement has complete immunity in its actions, this wouldn't be a problem. If law enforcement quit perpetuating the idea that it somehow has unlimited authority over the citizenry, this wouldn't be a problem. If we punished those who abused their power and authority at the expense of innocent homeowners exercising their right of self defense, this wouldn't be a problem.

Our acceptance, (or lack of it) has nothing to do with the facts. Cops enjoy immunity in almost every official act they commit. Just take a look at previous incidents around the country. Judges reinforce that immunity, as do departments and their leadership. Only the most blatant and egregious commissions of crimes are punished (and in many of those cases the punishments are much lighter than they would be for the average Joe or Jane Citizen). Acceptance has nothing to do with it.

 

[rmabrey]

I like the ruling, however it wont save you from being shot and the papers will spin it as another irresponsible gun owner story. So I agree, post the ruling on your windows

 

[PatriotPride]

If more police officers understood the simple fact that they run a very REAL chance of getting shot and killed when engaging in illegal activities, and more gun-owners defended themselves against such activities, then I'd wager that we'd see a marked decrease in incidents. Again, seems like a self-correcting problem.

 

[Redemption]

Kick in my door, get double tapped. Knock and announce yourself and reason for bothering me, no double tap. Pretty simple.

 

[88GT]

Our acceptance, (or lack of it) has nothing to do with the facts. Cops enjoy immunity in almost every official act they commit. Just take a look at previous incidents around the country. Judges reinforce that immunity, as do departments and their leadership. Only the most blatant and egregious commissions of crimes are punished (and in many of those cases the punishments are much lighter than they would be for the average Joe or Jane Citizen). Acceptance has nothing to do with it.

It is EXACTLY what you describe that we the populace accept. We have the power to change things, yet we do nothing but grouse about them on internet gun boards. We accept the power and authority of law enforcement and the judiciary to make those decisions because we do not oppose them and nullify them by our own actions. Our respect for the rule of law is generally a good thing, but at times it feeds the beast a little too well. But it would be impossible for the few in law enforcement to oppose a citizenry intent on disregarding the idea that unrestrained power and authority was the status quo. They could never arrest and convict enough of them.

Granted, we're talking about the extreme here. But our lack of action is a form of acceptance nonetheless.

 

[j706]

For the life of me I can't figure out why the two guys did what they did. It makes no sense to me. New maybe? Bad decisions can result in bad case law. Shame.

 

[finity]

For the life of me I can't figure out why the two guys did what they did. It makes no sense to me. New maybe? Bad decisions can result in bad case law. Shame.

I don't see this as being "bad case law".

Why should we (non-LEO's) be placed in a position to make a choice between being killed by someone(s) posing as LEO's during a home invasion & being convicted as a criminal for our reasonable response to mistakes that LEO's themselves make on executing an illegal S&S or an unnecessary no-knock warrant, especially if it's on the wrong house?

It's about time that the police are held accountable for their actions, even in some small way. They may have immunity from prosecution afterwards but if they don't want to be looking down the barrel of a gun when they bust in illegally they shouldn't do the busting in the first place unless they're damn sure they're in the right.

 

[jbombelli]

For the life of me I can't figure out why the two guys did what they did. It makes no sense to me. New maybe? Bad decisions can result in bad case law. Shame.

This, however is GOOD case law.

 

[jedi]

Okay so what occurs to Mr. Trotter now? All charges dropped?
Did Mr. Trotter lose any money in paying to defend himself for this?
What occurs to the LEO involved in this case?
Will the state appeal this to the Ind. SC?

 

[bigiron]

funny, i guess you can yell what you want while kicking in my door but it won't matter much. if its the middle of the night and i'm awaken like that, or by seeing you in my living room, its gonna get loud real quick. there won't be much time to identify yourself. i wish we had more of the officers thought process on this one.