Article Image
News Link • Law Enforcers or Peace Officers

Indiana legalizes shooting cops


Hold onto your holsters, folks: shooting a cop dead is now legal in the state of Indiana.

Governor Mitch Daniels, a Republican, has authorized changes to a 2006 legislation that legalizes the use of deadly force on a public servant — including an officer of the law — in cases of “unlawful intrusion.” Proponents of both the Second and Fourth Amendments — those that allow for the ownership of firearms and the security against unlawful searches, respectively — are celebrating the update by saying it ensures that residents are protected from authorities that abuse the powers of the badge.

Others, however, fear that the alleged threat of a police state emergence will be replaced by an all-out warzone in Indiana.

6 Comments in Response to

Comment by Arty Choke
Entered on:

 No, it is not watching TV... It's the Eye watching you along with the three stooges and Jack the Ripper.  You out-talk Charles Manson while serving time in jail. Like you he thinks he is Jesus Christ who knows everything out of nothing and understands notnhing..

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

Unfortunately, there are many - even millions - in America, who every day sit on chairs and enjoy the thought of shooting all kinds of people dead - and very often it is cops they are thinking about shooting. It's called, watching TV. And the ones thinking about doing the shooting are, as often as not, the children.

Because of the 4th and 5th Amendments, cops need a search warrant to enter a home uninvited. The only exception is if they witness violent activity happening that might be associated with crime. Outside of this, if cops enter a home uninvited, they are the crooks.

When lawmakers make laws protecting police officers, they are doing well. But what should law makers do when the good cop-protecting laws that they make are used by cops to protect themselves while they are doing criminal activity?

A suspect in his own home - one who is not acting violently - is what? What is a suspect? The answer is, a suspect is a SUSPECT - period. No matter what the media or the police think about the suspect, he is only a suspect until he has been proven guilty or innocent in a court of law.

If police enter the home of a suspect without proper warrant, especially when no immediate violence is observed to be happening, they (the cops) are acting criminally in several different ways. Among the ways are breaking of their Oaths of Office for not upholding the 4th and 5th Amendments - the Constitution - as they promised.

If they have an arrest warrant, but not a search warrant, they stay out! They serve the arrest warrant at a time when the SUSPECT is on public property. If the warrant is not for crimes that have no statute of limitations, and if the SUSPECT remains a voluntary prisoner in his own home until the statute of limitations has expired, he is off scott free, whether or not he was guilty of the crime(s) listed on the warrant.

The people of Indiana have become a little fed up with law makers. So, in order for the law makers to get re-elected - and maybe in order for them to avoid certain kinds of prosecution for causing public harm by making unConstitutional laws - the law makers are attempting to balance the previous laws that they had made. If Indiana law enforcement NEVER broke their Oaths of Office, Indiana law makers wouldn't have to take such drastic measures as this to protect themselves and Indiana citizens.

The thing that should have been done in the first place is, VERY FEW LAWS SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE FIRST PLACE. Why? Because you can't foresee all the possible usages of the laws that you make. You intended your laws for GOOD. Criminals among both, average citizens and law enforcement, figure out ways to twist the laws to use them to get away with criminal activity. This causes law makers to have to make laws upon laws just to balance the legal system out. Very soon, nobody - not lawyers or judges or citizens or Government as a whole - knows what is right or wrong. And they don't know how to deal with ANY situation justly.

What should be done in almost all situations when there are few laws, and when the laws that exist don't cover the facts of the case? Two things. The first is an emphatic FREEDOM for all in all the ways. The second is "corpus delicti."

The second is, if there is a disagreement of some kind, if there is damage or harm, bring forward the harmed person and/or the damaged property. Clarify the harm and or damage. Determine who did the harm and the damage. Then let the guilty parson repay, including for loss of time, for emotional damage, and court costs. If the guilty party caused loss of life - there are extenuating circumstances - after he makes repayment, execute him. Other than that, freedom for all.

Repealing most of the laws nationwide (not Constitutions and Bill of Rights), and following what is laid down in the previous paragraph, will not only make America strong, but it will serve to correct corruption in Government, will reduce the size of Government, will help to bring jobs back to America. And, it will do one other very good thing. Most of the lawyers will have to find a new job.

Comment by Bob Marks
Entered on:

 STUPID, STUPID, STUPID!!   Indiana did not legalize shooting cops!!! This is misinformation and disinformation.  And whoever wrote that headline should be smacked upside the head and kicked in the crotch!!!      

         Indiana has adopted the Castle Doctrine which was first added to the Indiana statutes in 1977 and this doctrine simply codified the common law right for one to defend, with lethal force if necessary, against anyone who attempts to enter your home without your permission or without a proper court order.  

       And "anyone"  included the police.    If cops are properly trained, they won't have a problem.   All this chatter against the statute is just anti-self defense crap and typical of those who fly by the seat of their pants without doing their homework.       The Association of Prosecuting Attorneys and the Fraternal Order of Police are part of the problem in spreading this misinformation and should be chastised for it.    - rochester, indiana       Here is info on the Castle doctrine which a number of states have.    Here is the actual Indiana statute prior to 2012 update.    Here is SB1 - The Indiana statutes as updated by the 2012 Indiana Legislature and signed by Governor Daniels.    Here is a list of some of the earlier court cases dealing with the right of self defense even against a Police Officer    The Supreme Court of the United States first asserted this right of self defense in the case of John Bad Elk in the year 1900.
Comment by Boston Releigh
Entered on:

Daniels says. "This law is not an invitation to use violence or force against law enforcement officers."

Sooooooo … what are you celebrating about?

You shoot ANYONE dead if you can … anyone at all who UNLAWFULLY invades your home. It need not be a cop … it could be anybody or any bad guy, and you do not have to pass a law to do this to defend yourself and your home… duh, dah!

You just don’t sit on your chair and enjoy the thought of shooting cops dead. You must know that what’s happening in Indiana is not a natural phenomenon – it is just politics that you ought to know.

You ought to know that the Indiana Supreme Court had already ruled you don’t shoot cops dead when they enter your home to get you because you are a criminal suspect that should be brought to justice.

You are a loony if you shoot cops dead because you served time in jail after they arrested you. You are more screwed up when you make a "hero" out of Larken Rose who wants to shoot cops dead after he was arrested and convicted as a tax felon for cheating the U.S. Federal Government of taxes.

Got that?

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

Wow, Larkin. Now you're a prophet.

Comment by Alicia Pepin
Entered on:


Good .

Join us on our Social Networks:


Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network: