Home / Crime / Indiana Citizens May Now Shoot Public Servants
Print Friendly and PDF

Indiana Citizens May Now Shoot Public Servants

Written by Gary North on June 12, 2012

Indiana is the firtst state that officially legalizes citizens to shoot any public servant who is unlawfully intruding into the citizen’s space.

Cops are outraged.

The National Rifle Association was behind this law, which grew out of a state supreme court ruling that citizens have no right to defend themselves.

Presumably, the state supreme court will rule this law unconstitutional. Maybe this ruling will be appealed.

The right to keep and bear arms has no judicial meaning if the citizen does not have the right to use a weapon to defend himself against unauthorized misuse of badges and guns.

This law reverses the trend of law enforcement agencies to use SWAT teams to break into homes where suspects have never lived.

“Oops. Sorry about that,” will no longer suffice. In Indiana, SWAT tram members are now at risk.

Still, to get your day in court, you must be alive. This law could lead to dead witnesses holding guns with a few rounds missing.

Passing a law is one thing. Defending yourself in court is another. You must firstĀ get into court.

Continue Reading on www.cleveland.com

Print Friendly and PDF

Posting Policy:
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

15 thoughts on “Indiana Citizens May Now Shoot Public Servants

  1. Looks like citizens were forced to protect themselves, since the judicial branch didn't.

  2. The drug seizure and forfeiture laws are the cause of this. When a law enforcement organization is running low on money, they stop pursuing crooks and start looking for ordinary citizens to investigate, in order to seize their property and sell it (to keep the proceeds, of course.)

    One property owner in the midwest, ten years ago, had a younger wife, and the authorities hoped that she was young enough to smoke pot. They got a search warrant, broke into the home around 2 AM. When the owner say armed intruders in his home, not in uniform, he shot at them. They shot back and kllled him. The intruders were not prosecuted, because the homeowner was “resisiting arrest.” No drugs were found.

    This aggressive abuse of the forfeiture laws is going to put more and more honest cops in danger.

    Just another public service brought to you by the federal government. Action, and reaction.

  3. ABSOLUTELY RIGHT! NOW "LAW ENFORCEMENT" CAN'T JUST BREAK DOWN DOORS OR ENTER WHENEVER THEY FEEL LIKE IT. And it's routinely done by most cops who choose to harass "criminals" they don't like.
    IT'S ABOUT TIME AND LONG OVERDUE!! Cops, nor elected officials, should have never been elevated over the general population in the first place; there is no elite order in America. The Constitution and other founding documents made that clear!
    BTW, GOOGLE "The Battle of Athens, Tennessee" for a real eye opener!!!!

  4. I think it's galling that it is an automatic death-penalty case if the victim happens to be an officer of the law—-since when is their death more important then the ordinary citizen? They claim it's because they are targeted by crimnals; honest, law-abiding citizens are targets as well, so what's different? LE has become far too aggressive for the American culture; in many communities, LE behaves like the gestapo of nazism rather than an American law enforcement agency. They are not the military, yet their training is militaristic by design–is this really necessary? Some people become balloon heads when they put on a uniform and then portray themselves as the worst kind of bully ever encountered. Generally speaking, I support our LE agencies; however, some of the things LE does are out-of-line and uncalled for. They need to be law enforcement agencies, NOT the militaristic and/or gestapo units they have become.

  5. Defending ones self — Standing your ground — Self defense. It seems the police feel they have rights private citizens do not. The police lately feel a need to use tasers on any person for what most would consider no reason at all.

    I say, its about time private citizens had their right/s upheld in and out of courts across the United States. Just maybe, it will give thought to police and troopers when pulling over the average private citizen. For the most part the private citizen is just — private. We like it that way.

    But somewhere along the police and troopers got ideas that using militant or military tactics to deal with a private citizen is more of what is needed.

    IF and if can be a really big word. If We the People the Private Citizen/s can tell the police and troopers to stand down or get shot down, that is really big.

  6. If the SWAT team breaks in, law or no law, they are going to kill you when you start defending yourself. I agree with defending yourself against all intruders but you better be awfully good at it if you want to be alive when the court battle starts.

  7. lilbear68 says:

    hell yeah! im movin there tomorrow

  8. There's a myth that "honest cops" exist…

  9. lilbear68 says:

    sadly the pigs are mad cause they will have to legally identify themselves and the fact that they have a warrant before crashing your door

  10. lilbear68 says:

    once it becomes obvious to the pigs that there are a lot of citizens willing to go down shooting and takin a few pigs with them they my be more likely to take a more diplomatic approach and recognize the rights they are laughably are sworn to protect and defend

  11. Need a reason to support this law; see the next article 'MARYLAND STATE TROOPERS'

  12. Send Obama to Indiana immediately before they change this law!

  13. Don't you realize that the FEDERAL FAMILY now consider themselves royalty. They are the masters and Americans are mearly serfs to support them in style of Kings and Caliphs.

    Check out the sausage king case. Stuart Alexander was being harassed by govt officals trying to shut down his multigenerational sausage business near San Francisco. He finally got so desperate he shot them. Later, in prison he died of "penut butter" overdose. (I kid you not) Google it under june 21 2000. I propose starting a " Stuart Alexander Brigade" as a tribute to him that took action against the Federal Family.

  14. claude slagenhop says:

    The US has progressively militarized the police so that they routinely violate the constitution and assault citizens as if they were a military force. Although we the people recognize the need for valid law enforcement, raiding someone's house for selling a little weed with a military force is overkill. FCUK the pigs.

  15. If the law changes the enforcement of laws expressly for revenue mentality and the terrorist attacks by the swat teams with their armored tanks resembling a Baghdad military maneuver then it's worth having. The police are no less likely to be attacked in routine operations because of the law. The periodical lunatics that the liberal bleeding hearts have rehabilitated and turned loose on the streets will be there but no more often than before.