Wednesday, June 13, 2012

The Ongoing War on...Cops? New Law in Indiana Makes it Open Season on Cops...

First it was Mitt "who needs cops, firefighters, and teachers" Romney and Rush "cops don't create wealth, they protect it, which is great" Limbaugh. Now the "good republicans" of Indiana have something against cops too. Last week, Indiana just made it legal for people to go ahead and "fire" them for good. This is disturbing and very bad news for law enforcement officers:

From I Acknowledge Class Warfare Exists, there's this:
“If I pull over a car and I walk up to it and the guy shoots me, he’s going to say, ‘Well, he was trying to illegally enter my property.  Somebody is going get away with killing a cop because of this law.”~Police Sergeant Joseph Hubbard 
First of all – this is not a story from the Onion.  The Republican party is getting stranger and stranger … they went out of their way to amend a law making it legal to shoot police officers.  I didn’t realize they hated unions that much; WTF is wrong with these people?
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. 
Under the latest changes of the so-called Castle Doctrine, state lawmakers agree “people have a right to defend themselves and third parties from physical harm and crime.” Rather than excluding officers of the law, however, any public servant is now subject to be met with deadly force if they unlawfully enter private property without clear justification. (Russia Today

From Bloomberg:

The measure was approved by the Republican-controlled Legislature and signed by Republican Governor Mitch Daniels in March. It amended a 2006 so-called Castle Doctrine bill that allows deadly force to stop illegal entry into a home or car.


  1. No. This law was passed in response to the numerous illegal home-invasion entries made by police (numerous ones at the wrong address, even); leading to many innocent deaths. The law is specific to unlawful entry to a citizens home. With the increasing para-militarization of police, and abusive behavior by them, we need protections.

    Indiana had also, some years ago, passed a law that no citizen, under ANY circumstances, had the right to defend themselves from a cop. Not only are laws like that violations of the Constitution, but they toss the Bill of Rights in the trash.

    I can't stand Republican ideology, but this is one case where the citizens of Indiana benefit, and the police are put on notice to get their addresses and procedures properly in place before they kick in another door and riddle a 92-year old woman with bullets.

  2. No. This law was passed to pander to hard-core gun rights constituents in an election year. It's a solution to a non-existent problem. As Mitch Daniels himself said: “In the real world, there will almost never be a situation in which these extremely narrow conditions are met,” Daniels says. “This law is not an invitation to use violence or force against law enforcement officers.”

    It invites gun owners (and actual criminals) to think they have a right to shoot cops, people serving warrants, mail carriers, or anyone they think might be a government agent - Avon lady, kids cutting across the yard, Girl Scouts (they're in uniform, right?). Child services case workers conducting home visits are already entering emotionally charged situations.

    It makes it up to the individual to decide if the government officer is entering property (and what is meant by property), if they have a valid warrant, pose a threat, how great a threat, and how to appropriately respond to the perceived threat with "reasonably necessary" force. Possibly in a matter of seconds in a typically very tense situation. When gun owners are allowed to use their judgement to shoot first and sort things out later, it leads to the kind of tragedies we're seeing with the stand-your-ground laws.

    "It's just a recipe for disaster," Tim Downs, president of Indiana State Fraternal Order of Police

    It's putting the lives of police officers and many other innocent people, including the lives of the gun owners themselves, at risk in order to score some political points.

    1. Thanks for the clarification, and it's much worse than I thought. We've entered a brave new world--no, a *frightened and heavily armed new world*--of libertarian extremism combined with the right's gun fetish. More violence. More insanity. All driven by a cartoonish vision of what constitutes "liberty." People in the US kill more people than Canada, Japan, and Europe combined. For what reason? "Liberty."