Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 106
Like Tree2Likes

Thread: Wow Americans, kiss your 4th Amendment rights goodbye.

  1. #1
    Flagg's Avatar
    Flagg is offline Knowledgeable Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Front toward enemy
    Posts
    6,265

    Wow Americans, kiss your 4th Amendment rights goodbye.

    In the state of Indiana, Law Enforcement Officers may now enter your home for any reason or no reason, and may do so with or without your consent. They don't need a warrant, they don't even need to knock.

    http://www.newsroomamerica.com/story...ice_entry.html

    Full article:
    Indiana High Court Says No Right to Resist Illegal Police Entry
    By Jon E. Dougherty at 14 May 13:52

    (Newsroom America) -- The Indiana Supreme Court ruled Friday that state residents have no right to resist an illegal police entry, overturning a Common Law that dates back to the English Magna Carta of 1215.

    Writing for the court's 3-2 majority, Justice Steven David said if a police officer wanted to enter a home for any reason - or for no reason - homeowners could do nothing to block the officer's entry.

    "We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David wrote, according to the Northwest Indiana Times. "We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest."

    He said persons arrested after an illegal police entry are still entitled to post bail and can seek remedies through the legal system.

    The ruling stems from a case involving an argument between a husband and wife that took place outside of their apartment, the report said. When police arrived, they both went back inside and the husband told officers they weren't needed.

    When one officer tried to enter the apartment the husband attempted to block him. An officer entered anyway and the husband then shoved him against a wall, prompting a second officer to use a stun gun on the husband and arrest him.

    Ivan Bodensteiner, a professor at the Valparaiso University School of Law, said he agreed with the court's decision, the report said.

    "It's not surprising that they would say there's no right to beat the hell out of the officer," he told the paper. "(The court is saying) we would rather opt on the side of saying if the police act wrongfully in entering your house your remedy is under law, to bring a civil action against the officer."

    Justices Robert Rucker and Brent Dickson dissented, saying the ruling violates the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment.

    "In my view the majority sweeps with far too broad a brush by essentially telling Indiana citizens that government agents may now enter their homes illegally -- that is, without the necessity of a warrant, consent or exigent circumstances. I disagree," Rucker wrote, according to the report.

  2. #2
    wmaousley's Avatar
    wmaousley is offline American Bedoo
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Kuwait/Florida
    Posts
    3,518
    Man thats horrible, whats next????

  3. #3
    zabster151's Avatar
    zabster151 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    812
    holy shit this is so bad, this is the stuff i have been talking about for years, they have been trying to change the laws so they can also pull you over for no reason at all. just like russia

    i hope people start shooting cops and killing them when they enter there homes.

  4. #4
    Flagg's Avatar
    Flagg is offline Knowledgeable Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Front toward enemy
    Posts
    6,265
    Quote Originally Posted by zabster151 View Post
    holy shit this is so bad, this is the stuff i have been talking about for years, they have been trying to change the laws so they can also pull you over for no reason at all. just like russia

    i hope people start shooting cops and killing them when they enter there homes.
    Isn't there a law in some states called "Texas Law" where you are allowed to use force or firearms on univited intruders entering your property? I don't see how officers would be above this, or are peace keepers now above the Constitution?

  5. #5
    MACHINE5150's Avatar
    MACHINE5150 is offline "AR's Vanilla Gorilla"
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,651
    yet another reason America is no longer the free'st country in the world anymore
    Red Bastard likes this.

  6. #6
    JohnnyVegas's Avatar
    JohnnyVegas is offline Knowledgeable Member- Recognized Member Winner - $100
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    The Desert
    Posts
    5,963
    I realize why they passed this: if the police make a mistake, which can happen, you are not entitled to assault or shoot the police officer. They believe you should comply and get it straightened out legally, without violence.

    Having said that, I don't think I like the idea of this law because it makes the repercussions less when mistakes are made. The cops will know that if they don't do enough research, and bust into a house where nobody is breaking the law, it will be OK. I believe they should fear losing their jobs if they make a mistake and bust into the home of a law abiding citizen. That should always be a huge no-no in this country.

  7. #7
    zabster151's Avatar
    zabster151 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    812
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyVegas View Post
    I realize why they passed this:WTF if the police make a mistake, which can happen, you are not entitled to assault or shoot the police officer. They believe you should comply and get it straightened out legally, without violence. so your trying to say get you door kicked in get beat up by a cop. look like a bitch in front of your family
    maybe loose your job because of this,, and you think o well will just figure it out later in court, **** that thats bitch shit right there. if these cops cant figure out what house they should be raiding then dont raid the house. they usually stake these houses out for months before a raid if they mess that up they are pretty much usless., also the law suites to come from this will bankrupt the state
    all and all.

    [/B][/B][/B][/B]
    Having said that, I don't think I like the idea of this law because it makes the repercussions less when mistakes are made. The cops will know that if they don't do enough research, and bust into a house where nobody is breaking the law, it will be OK. I believe they should fear losing their jobs if they make a mistake and bust into the home of a law abiding citizen. That should always be a huge no-no in this country.
    "this is against everything America stands for"
    Last edited by zabster151; 05-16-2011 at 01:54 PM.

  8. #8
    bjpennnn's Avatar
    bjpennnn is offline American Psycho
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5,750
    this is disturbing to me.

  9. #9
    Flagg's Avatar
    Flagg is offline Knowledgeable Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Front toward enemy
    Posts
    6,265
    While this law is thinly veiled with "good intentions", such as those where a woman suffering from domestic violence can get immediate help, there are too many implications. Police Officers get a bad rep as it is, you only have to see that a cop acting outside his jurisdiction and filmed is taken to the cleaners. It's not impossible to believe that cops could break into someones home and do something ridiculous, based on misinformation. And it shouldn't be ignored that corruption is everywhere. A cop breaks into a suspects house, drops a bag of coke and looks at the suspect and says "what's that?", and its that persons word against his.

    That, and if this passes, its the beginning of a slippery slope where other stuff is allowed to happen.

    There's a reason that several Scandanavian countries are considered more democratic than anywhere else in the world now.

  10. #10
    jtuner77 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    777
    I dont think this will last. This is just plain stupid.

  11. #11
    jimmyinkedup's Avatar
    jimmyinkedup is offline Disappointment* Known SCAMMER - Do Not Trust *
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Scamming my brothers
    Posts
    11,286
    Blog Entries
    2
    Law enforcement has been essentially wiping their ass with the constitution in many many ways for years. If thats not scary enough the scarier part is in several ways - this just being the most recent - they are now knowingly being permitted to do so. Very disturbing
    Last edited by jimmyinkedup; 05-16-2011 at 03:56 PM.

  12. #12
    JohnnyVegas's Avatar
    JohnnyVegas is offline Knowledgeable Member- Recognized Member Winner - $100
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    The Desert
    Posts
    5,963
    Quote Originally Posted by zabster151 View Post
    so your trying to say get you door kicked in get beat up by a cop. look like a bitch in front of your family maybe loose your job because of this,, and you think o well will just figure it out later in court, **** that thats bitch shit right there. if these cops cant figure out what house they should be raiding then dont raid the house. they usually stake these houses out for months before a raid if they mess that up they are pretty much usless., also the law suites to come from this will bankrupt the state all and all.
    No, that is not what I am trying to say. That is why that sentence starts with the words "they say". What I think about the law is in the second paragraph. I am not for it. It is possible to understand where they are coming from without agreeing with them. I know people will think this is being done for the express reason of allowing law enforcement into your home whenever they want, but that is not true. They are saying you cannot resist, but they still don't want to open themselves up to civil lawsuits or public outcry.

  13. #13
    Bigd89's Avatar
    Bigd89 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,053
    Break into my house and I will fvcking shoot you. I don't care who you are.

  14. #14
    zabster151's Avatar
    zabster151 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    812
    I know people will think this is being done for the express reason of allowing law enforcement into your home whenever they want, but that is not true. They are saying you cannot resist, "hell ya i can resist if i did nothing wrong" i would not sit in jail for the night and then figure it out in court that i was right and the cops were wrong but they still don't want to open themselves up to civil lawsuits or public outcry.there will be tons the fact that they are saying you cant resist is discusting

    hey johnny im not arguing with ya im just picking apart what is beging said allot of it is disturbing. this is crazy

  15. #15
    zabster151's Avatar
    zabster151 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    812
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyVegas View Post
    No, that is not what I am trying to say. That is why that sentence starts with the words "they say". What I think about the law is in the second paragraph. I am not for it. It is possible to understand where they are coming from without agreeing with them. I know people will think this is being done for the express reason of allowing law enforcement into your home whenever they want, but that is not true. thats exactly what this is They are saying you cannot resist,if i did nothing wrong i will resist but they still don't want to open themselves up to civil lawsuits or public outcry.
    im not arguing with ya man im just picking this apart because its incredibly disturbing.

  16. #16
    JohnnyVegas's Avatar
    JohnnyVegas is offline Knowledgeable Member- Recognized Member Winner - $100
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    The Desert
    Posts
    5,963
    Quote Originally Posted by zabster151 View Post
    im not arguing with ya man im just picking this apart because its incredibly disturbing.
    No worries, I have always enjoyed your point of view.

    We can agree to disagree on whether this is being done to allow them access to your home with no restrictions (as apposed to protecting themselves if they make a mistake). I don't completely trust the government, but I don't think they are trying to turn us into slaves either. I think they are a bunch of selfish, money and power hungry people, but not coordinated enough to pull together the kind of domination that many fear.

    To be clear, again, I think it is disturbing as well. And don't agree with it. I just think we communicate differently. I have always been the kind of person to look at things logically, rather than emotionally, so it may be harder to see that I am upset. I don't scream "those mother f**kers can kiss my *ss if they think I will allow anyone in my home without getting a hole in the head!" Not my style.

  17. #17
    zabster151's Avatar
    zabster151 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    812
    lol, yea when typing anything its very easy to mistake frustration, with directly being mad at the person, i think alot of people mis undersatand what i typ because i jump on here typ quick about touchy subjects and try to get a point across. that begging said i love this board and weather i argue with someone or not on here. you guys are great..

    i would help anyone on this board protect there family from bullshit like this,

  18. #18
    Times Roman's Avatar
    Times Roman is offline Anabolic Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Back from Afghanistan
    Posts
    27,383
    let's look at this another way.

    we all know how media "spin" to get a reaction. If the two were arguing, and the police show up as a result, I'm thinking there could have been more going on than simple verbalizations between the spouses. Domestic violance is the #1 motivation for murder. I'm thinking (based on the very limited info avialable) that this thing may have gotten physical between the two, and quite often, drugs/alchohol are involved. Entry would have been motivated by the theory of eminent danger to the smaller of the two spouses.

    Now suppose the courts ruled the other way, and said the citizen has the right to defend and bar entry to an illegal entry. Who decides what is legal/illegal in the heat of passion? The citizen, feeling embolded, now pulls out a handgun to prevent entry and blows the cop away.

    This is NOT about you losing your 4th amendment rights. If the police enter illegally, they can be prosecuted. Or a civil suit can be brought against them.

    This is about the courts preventing citizens from defending / barring entry at a time such as this.

    Finally, you try to block entry or defend against a cop, and what do you think will happen? Remember, the cop has a gun.....

  19. #19
    brad1986's Avatar
    brad1986 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    killafornia
    Posts
    1,027
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyVegas View Post
    No, that is not what I am trying to say. That is why that sentence starts with the words "they say". What I think about the law is in the second paragraph. I am not for it. It is possible to understand where they are coming from without agreeing with them. I know people will think this is being done for the express reason of allowing law enforcement into your home whenever they want, but that is not true. They are saying you cannot resist, but they still don't want to open themselves up to civil lawsuits or public outcry.
    I disagree 100% with you. I think that is exactly why this law was put in place. Plus the amount of bail people will post after being falsely arrested will make the state lots of money. Power and money is the motivation behind this. I hope peoppe shoot these ****ers as soon as they enter there property. Just because he has a badge does not mean he is a good person and does not mean i trust him unauthourized in my home with my family. If my door gets kicked in im shooting and asking questions later

  20. #20
    brad1986's Avatar
    brad1986 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    killafornia
    Posts
    1,027
    Quote Originally Posted by Times Roman View Post
    let's look at this another way.

    we all know how media "spin" to get a reaction. If the two were arguing, and the police show up as a result, I'm thinking there could have been more going on than simple verbalizations between the spouses. Domestic violance is the #1 motivation for murder. I'm thinking (based on the very limited info avialable) that this thing may have gotten physical between the two, and quite often, drugs/alchohol are involved. Entry would have been motivated by the theory of eminent danger to the smaller of the two spouses.

    Now suppose the courts ruled the other way, and said the citizen has the right to defend and bar entry to an illegal entry. Who decides what is legal/illegal in the heat of passion? The citizen, feeling embolded, now pulls out a handgun to prevent entry and blows the cop away.

    This is NOT about you losing your 4th amendment rights. If the police enter illegally, they can be prosecuted. Or a civil suit can be brought against them.

    This is about the courts preventing citizens from defending / barring entry at a time such as this.

    Finally, you try to block entry or defend against a cop, and what do you think will happen? Remember, the cop has a gun.....
    So do I

  21. #21
    gixxerboy1's Avatar
    gixxerboy1 is offline ~VET~ Extraordinaire~
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    32,803
    Quote Originally Posted by Times Roman View Post
    let's look at this another way.

    we all know how media "spin" to get a reaction. If the two were arguing, and the police show up as a result, I'm thinking there could have been more going on than simple verbalizations between the spouses. Domestic violance is the #1 motivation for murder. I'm thinking (based on the very limited info avialable) that this thing may have gotten physical between the two, and quite often, drugs/alchohol are involved. Entry would have been motivated by the theory of eminent danger to the smaller of the two spouses.

    Now suppose the courts ruled the other way, and said the citizen has the right to defend and bar entry to an illegal entry. Who decides what is legal/illegal in the heat of passion? The citizen, feeling embolded, now pulls out a handgun to prevent entry and blows the cop away.

    This is NOT about you losing your 4th amendment rights. If the police enter illegally, they can be prosecuted. Or a civil suit can be brought against them.

    This is about the courts preventing citizens from defending / barring entry at a time such as this.

    Finally, you try to block entry or defend against a cop, and what do you think will happen? Remember, the cop has a gun.....
    I agree. Even in the court ruling it says "illegal" entry. Which is saying the court realize that the officer is wrong but it is safer for everyone for it not to turn physical. Its not giving cops permission to enter you house any time they want to. Then you can legally go after the cop and police force for illegally entering your home.

  22. #22
    Twist's Avatar
    Twist is offline "AR's Personal Trainer"
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    california
    Posts
    4,136
    I agree with you and TR, but cops make things up. There is no illegal entry because there is always an excuse

  23. #23
    Panzerfaust's Avatar
    Panzerfaust is offline Ron Paul Nuthugger
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Deutschland
    Posts
    8,788
    Isn't it hilarious that a population so armed to the teeth are such obedient serfs?
    ArmWrestler Dude likes this.
    ***No source checks!!!***

  24. #24
    brad1986's Avatar
    brad1986 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    killafornia
    Posts
    1,027
    Quote Originally Posted by Panzerfaust View Post
    Isn't it hilarious that a population so armed to the teeth are such obedient serfs?
    YOu know what? thats the smartest thing i think ive heard.... I wonder this all the time. We do have the right to overthrow an appresive government ins in our constitution but people over here are so caught up in there money making sucsessful lives that they lose the backbone to stand up for whats right and instead they listen to whatever the police say no matter what

  25. #25
    songdog's Avatar
    songdog is offline ARs TOP DOG ~ MONITOR ~
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    13,533
    I believe the reason this happen.Was beacuse of a domestic fight.I think they wanted to make sure the women was ok.Beacuse behind closed doors she couldve been scared to say anything.The police may not have been right.But they couldve saved the womens life if things were different.Then if the police just left and she got killed.Everyone wouldve said the police didnt do their job.Somethings aint black and white.

  26. #26
    NoCompromise's Avatar
    NoCompromise is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Squat Rack / Kitchen
    Posts
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by Flagg View Post
    Isn't there a law in some states called "Texas Law" where you are allowed to use force or firearms on univited intruders entering your property? I don't see how officers would be above this, or are peace keepers now above the Constitution?
    ohio has whats known as the castle law. the use of deadly force in you castle (home)

  27. #27
    gixxerboy1's Avatar
    gixxerboy1 is offline ~VET~ Extraordinaire~
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    32,803
    Quote Originally Posted by NoCompromise View Post
    ohio has whats known as the castle law. the use of deadly force in you castle (home)
    and try that on someone you know is a police officer and you just dont want them to enter. You will spend the rest of your life in jail

  28. #28
    NoCompromise's Avatar
    NoCompromise is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Squat Rack / Kitchen
    Posts
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by gixxerboy1 View Post
    and try that on someone you know is a police officer and you just dont want them to enter. You will spend the rest of your life in jail
    I agree with you 100%. I run a supplement shop and have alot of regulars that are law enforcement and this topic has come up many times. most of them have admitted to me about tricking people but all agree that they wouldnt't force entry into a residence. but yet i agree with ya 100%

  29. #29
    Lemonada8's Avatar
    Lemonada8 is offline Knowledgeable Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Read my blog
    Posts
    3,691
    Blog Entries
    2
    This happens all the time at college parties. the cops show up and walk right in usually w/o a complaint other than they see a party. If you dont answer the door they go around and walk in, if you do they walk right in. It just sucks now that you cant do anything to stop them from entering.

    and there is too much political bullsh*t nowadays...

  30. #30
    chumpster is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by Flagg View Post
    In the state of Indiana, Law Enforcement Officers may now enter your home for any reason or no reason, and may do so with or without your consent. They don't need a warrant, they don't even need to knock.

    http://www.newsroomamerica.com/story...ice_entry.html

    Full article:
    Indiana High Court Says No Right to Resist Illegal Police Entry
    By Jon E. Dougherty at 14 May 13:52

    (Newsroom America) -- The Indiana Supreme Court ruled Friday that state residents have no right to resist an illegal police entry, overturning a Common Law that dates back to the English Magna Carta of 1215.

    Writing for the court's 3-2 majority, Justice Steven David said if a police officer wanted to enter a home for any reason - or for no reason - homeowners could do nothing to block the officer's entry.

    "We believe ... a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence," David wrote, according to the Northwest Indiana Times. "We also find that allowing resistance unnecessarily escalates the level of violence and therefore the risk of injuries to all parties involved without preventing the arrest."

    He said persons arrested after an illegal police entry are still entitled to post bail and can seek remedies through the legal system.

    The ruling stems from a case involving an argument between a husband and wife that took place outside of their apartment, the report said. When police arrived, they both went back inside and the husband told officers they weren't needed.

    When one officer tried to enter the apartment the husband attempted to block him. An officer entered anyway and the husband then shoved him against a wall, prompting a second officer to use a stun gun on the husband and arrest him.

    Ivan Bodensteiner, a professor at the Valparaiso University School of Law, said he agreed with the court's decision, the report said.

    "It's not surprising that they would say there's no right to beat the hell out of the officer," he told the paper. "(The court is saying) we would rather opt on the side of saying if the police act wrongfully in entering your house your remedy is under law, to bring a civil action against the officer."

    Justices Robert Rucker and Brent Dickson dissented, saying the ruling violates the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment.

    "In my view the majority sweeps with far too broad a brush by essentially telling Indiana citizens that government agents may now enter their homes illegally -- that is, without the necessity of a warrant, consent or exigent circumstances. I disagree," Rucker wrote, according to the report.
    I think if the doors open the pigs can charge in. Happens all the time. If that door is closed on the other hand, and they try to come in*cha ching* dead piggy.

    Our rights are a ffing joke as it is. Look at what the TSA is doing at airports. The sad part is most Americans are too stupid to fight any of this.

  31. #31
    chumpster is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnnyVegas View Post
    I realize why they passed this: if the police make a mistake, which can happen, you are not entitled to assault or shoot the police officer. They believe you should comply and get it straightened out legally, without violence.

    Having said that, I don't think I like the idea of this law because it makes the repercussions less when mistakes are made. The cops will know that if they don't do enough research, and bust into a house where nobody is breaking the law, it will be OK. I believe they should fear losing their jobs if they make a mistake and bust into the home of a law abiding citizen. That should always be a huge no-no in this country.
    Losing their jobs is the first step, and prosecuting them is the next. I suppose the third is lynching the pigs. The problem is that the DAs won't typically go after the cops on criminal charges. Thanks to everyone having Video recording options, this is starting to change. The police unions are notoriously bad in that they'll protect corrupt cops as much as good ones. Cops have historically had the advantages of being able to break any laws they wanted, but now with video, hopefully it'll start going more in the publics favor.

  32. #32
    Lemonada8's Avatar
    Lemonada8 is offline Knowledgeable Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Read my blog
    Posts
    3,691
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by chumpster View Post
    I think if the doors open the pigs can charge in. Happens all the time. If that door is closed on the other hand, and they try to come in*cha ching* dead piggy.

    Our rights are a ffing joke as it is. Look at what the TSA is doing at airports. The sad part is most Americans are too stupid to fight any of this.

    TSA is in a very tight spot, in this political correct country of ours. If they start profiling then their fuked. THye have to do it according to a system, and yes it has its flaws but thats due to the legal inability to racial profile. Its a sharp double edged sword...

  33. #33
    chumpster is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    43
    Yep, totally stupid. They do profile, but politically they can't own up to it, and they have to continue this farce of putting their hands up kids crotches, and harassing 90 year old women. Bottom line is profiling is the real answer to airport security. The other issue is that TSA are hired out of a pool of uneducated, non security people. Israels profilers are equivalent to ex FBI interrogates. Very skilled people who are not from the Walmart gene pool. Our TSA on the other hand is full of stupid people hoping to get a gov job with no security backgrounds.

    It's sad...

  34. #34
    chumpster is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    43
    Quote Originally Posted by chumpster View Post
    Yep, totally stupid. They do profile, but politically they can't own up to it, and they have to continue this farce of putting their hands up kids crotches, and harassing 90 year old women. Bottom line is profiling is the real answer to airport security. The other issue is that TSA are hired out of a pool of uneducated, non security people. Israels profilers are equivalent to ex FBI interrogates. Very skilled people who are not from the Walmart gene pool. Our TSA on the other hand is full of stupid people hoping to get a gov job with no security backgrounds.

    It's sad...
    That and most Americans don't care about their history and rights and want to become little sheep.

  35. #35
    JBlue's Avatar
    JBlue is offline New Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    27
    Police State. Seriously I'm in Canada and I am awed at some of the news that come from the US. How is this remotely benefiting or protecting the citizens in anyway?

  36. #36
    l2elapse's Avatar
    l2elapse is offline That don't kill me, can only make me stronger
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,330
    as the constitution continues to decline..eventually it will be gone

  37. #37
    Bonaparte's Avatar
    Bonaparte is offline AR-Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    13,504
    I don't see how this is a shock.
    All this means is that you cannot physically stop a cop from entering your house in Indiana, not that he has the right to do so anytime he pleases.
    Without a warrant or probable cause, anything he finds won't be admissible in court anyway, so I don't see why you guys are flipping out.
    It's not like cops are just going to start walking into your house every day to check on you (since that would be extremely risky for them, illegal, and a huge pain in the ass waste of time).

  38. #38
    zaggahamma's Avatar
    zaggahamma is offline Mr. Moderation
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Orlando
    Posts
    19,495
    Quote Originally Posted by Bonaparte View Post
    I don't see how this is a shock.
    All this means is that you cannot physically stop a cop from entering your house in Indiana, not that he has the right to do so anytime he pleases.
    Without a warrant or probable cause, anything he finds won't be admissible in court anyway, so I don't see why you guys are flipping out.
    It's not like cops are just going to start walking into your house every day to check on you (since that would be extremely risky for them, illegal, and a huge pain in the ass waste of time).
    who was flipping out....and youd be surprised at what cops would do...if u dont see this as an infringement on ppls rights i doubt you ever will

  39. #39
    brad1986's Avatar
    brad1986 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    killafornia
    Posts
    1,027
    Quote Originally Posted by jpkman View Post
    who was flipping out....and youd be surprised at what cops would do...if u dont see this as an infringement on ppls rights i doubt you ever will
    AGREED! Police do that anyway now imagine if they had less restraints on what they couldnt do. scarry sh!t imo. I have been illegally searched and illegally arrested several times and charges were all dropped. but i still had legal fees i still missed work for court i still had to pay bail to get out of jail. Just because it doesnt hold up in court doesnt mean your life isnt very effected and leaves you feeling violated and helpless

  40. #40
    brad1986's Avatar
    brad1986 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    killafornia
    Posts
    1,027
    Why did america even kick englands ass 300 years ago? (no offence to the uk residents here lol) Our forefathers would be turning in their graves if they saw what these liberal socialists were doing to our country

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •