Pubbie v. left THUNDERDOME (apparently)

[Nessus]

INDIANAPOLIS | Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.

In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything 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 said. "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."

David said a person arrested following an unlawful entry by police still can be released on bail and has plenty of opportunities to protest the illegal entry through the court system.

The court's decision stems from a Vanderburgh County case in which police were called to investigate a husband and wife arguing outside their apartment.

When the couple went back inside their apartment, the husband told police they were not needed and blocked the doorway so they could not enter. When an officer entered anyway, the husband shoved the officer against a wall. A second officer then used a stun gun on the husband and arrested him.

Professor Ivan Bodensteiner, of Valparaiso University School of Law, said the court's decision is consistent with the idea of preventing violence.

"It's not surprising that they would say there's no right to beat the hell out of the officer," Bodensteiner said. "(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."

Justice Robert Rucker, a Gary native, and Justice Brent Dickson, a Hobart native, dissented from the ruling, saying the court's decision runs afoul of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

"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," Rucker said. "I disagree."

Rucker and Dickson suggested if the court had limited its permission for police entry to domestic violence situations they would have supported the ruling.

But Dickson said, "The wholesale abrogation of the historic right of a person to reasonably resist unlawful police entry into his dwelling is unwarranted and unnecessarily broad."

This is the second major Indiana Supreme Court ruling this week involving police entry into a home.

On Tuesday, the court said police serving a warrant may enter a home without knocking if officers decide circumstances justify it. Prior to that ruling, police serving a warrant would have to obtain a judge's permission to enter without knocking.

Some people on the Internet are getting mighty upset about this.

Is this one of those Pubbie things where you fuck the poor and jizz goes to fund the rich? If the cops can show up without proper procedure, any evidence they get will be tainted if the accused can afford a lawyer to point that out. So black crack user goes to prison, white collar fuck-face gets a blowjob from the judge and the cops. Is that about right?

[Loki]

I'm willing to bet that the judges ruling in the majority in this decision are more left wing than the dissenters...

[Nessus]

I'm willing to bet that the judges ruling in the majority in this decision are more left wing than the dissenters...

Rar rar at you, too. (Is this a 'one-liner'?)

Is this against the US constitution, though? It'd be interesting if it were.

[GGT]

Couple this with Indiana's new bill de-funding Planned Parenthood.

No-knock warrants means the police know best. Knock-down abortion rights means the state knows best.

Yet, Indiana claims to be a Freeedom Loving, Small Government, Pro-Life state. Their governor is considered a Republican candidate for POTUS.

Fuck yeah.

[GGT]

"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 said. "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."

Would love to see a debate between Freeedom loving states like Indiana and Texas. Concealed weapons, shoot-to-kill, protecting Property, home-owner as tax-payer......police as civil servant or extension of a fascist state....etc.

Go go USA #1!

[Loki]

Remind me why you haven't moved to Canada yet?

[Nessus]

Remind me why you haven't moved to Canada yet?

Is this a 'one-liner'?

[Loki]

I'm genuinely curious. I'm more than a little sick of her constant "Go Go USA" mockery. For someone who thinks that just about everything that could be wrong with the country is wrong, she doesn't seem to be concerned enough to move to a place that is lacking in most of these "problems". So she's either consistently engaging in hyperbole or is a hypocrite.

Regarding your previous question, I think this decision clearly violates a strict interpretation of the constitution. At no point does the constitution say that the prevention of unnecessary violence should take precedence over respecting a person's constitutional rights. Judges have a way of finding constitutional loopholes to justify their preexisting beliefs though.

[Nessus]

I'm genuinely curious. I'm more than a little sick of her constant "Go Go USA" mockery. For someone who thinks that just about everything that could be wrong with the country is wrong, she doesn't seem to be concerned enough to move to a place that is lacking in most of these "problems". So she's either consistently engaging in hyperbole or is a hypocrite.

But by this logic, you're legitimizing Nazi Germany. If one were Jewish, or homosexual, one was wise to move out, for the goings were dire. Which implicitly means that any anti-Nazi activity, love of Germany before Nazism or anything like that was meaningless, one need only look out for number one. If the Pubs are hell-bent on destroying what is perceived as the good bits of America, you have no legs to stand on, Pubs have a manifest destiny and if you're not with them you're in their way. Is that how it goes? Protest and dissent are anti-democracy?

[Loki]

But by this logic, you're legitimizing Nazi Germany. If one were Jewish, or homosexual, one was wise to move out, for the goings were dire. Which implicitly means that any anti-Nazi activity, love of Germany before Nazism or anything like that was meaningless, one need only look out for number one. If the Pubs are hell-bent on destroying what is perceived as the good bits of America, you have no legs to stand on, Pubs have a manifest destiny and if you're not with them you're in their way. Is that how it goes? Protest and dissent are anti-democracy?

I'm saying nothing about the legitimacy of the state's actions. A Jew who had the ability to flee Nazi Germany but chose not to was frankly not engaging in very smart behavior. If the US is as bad as GGT constantly claims, it's in her interest to leave the country; she's certainly not going to change it. And despite your implications there, I have no problem with criticizing a country. There are quite a few things wrong with the US (and every other country). But GGT seems to believe that every major part of the US is fundamentally broken. In that case, I fail to see why she's willingly continuing to expose herself and her children to this horrible state.

[Nessus]

I'm saying nothing about the legitimacy of the state's actions. A Jew who had the ability to flee Nazi Germany but chose not to was frankly not engaging in very smart behavior. If the US is as bad as GGT constantly claims, it's in her interest to leave the country; she's certainly not going to change it. And despite your implications there, I have no problem with criticizing a country. There are quite a few things wrong with the US (and every other country). But GGT seems to believe that every major part of the US is fundamentally broken. In that case, I fail to see why she's willingly continuing to expose herself and her children to this horrible state.

Well, you do seem to suffer from a chronic inability to relate to other people.

What I meant with the "perceived good bits" was, in part, an allusion to the patriotic feeling. We form emotional ties (well, some of us), to people, to places. It may not be rational, but it's human. Of course in your crusade against hypocrisy and all-around Vulcanism, that's easy to brush aside, but it's quite asinine.

[Loki]

Well, you do seem to suffer from a chronic inability to relate to other people.

What I meant with the "perceived good bits" was, in part, an allusion to the patriotic feeling. We form emotional ties (well, some of us), to people, to places. It may not be rational, but it's human. Of course in your crusade against hypocrisy and all-around Vulcanism, that's easy to brush aside, but it's quite asinine.

Except she seems to think all those people and places are broken beyond recognition.

[GGT]

I'm genuinely curious. I'm more than a little sick of her constant "Go Go USA" mockery. For someone who thinks that just about everything that could be wrong with the country is wrong, she doesn't seem to be concerned enough to move to a place that is lacking in most of these "problems". So she's either consistently engaging in hyperbole or is a hypocrite.

You're not "genuine" about anything, let alone your curiosity. You've been more than willing to use personal assaults to suggest I'm nothing more than a thorn in your side. Poor baby Loki. sniff sniff

I've posted plenty of my ideas and alternatives, but your ONLY response is that I'm either lying, willfully ignorant, or hypocritical. After a while, the best reply I can make..... is to be sarcastic about USA dominance as a Superpower or leader for the rest of the world, using the cheerleader emoticon. Ironic, really, since LOKI hasn't suggested one damn thing that would get the US out of its mockery deserved position.

[Nessus]

Except she seems to think all those people and places are broken beyond recognition.

Is that a 'one-liner'?

Is beyond recognition the same as beyond repair?

[Loki]

Is that a 'one-liner'?

Is beyond recognition the same as beyond repair?

Have any of her ideas for repairs ever been implemented?

[Nessus]

Have any of her ideas for repairs ever been implemented?

How is implementation legitimization? (Are these 'one-liners'?) A lot of Stalin's ideas were implemented. So were Mao's. Those guys were nuts.

[Loki]

How is implementation legitimization? (Are these 'one-liners'?) A lot of Stalin's ideas were implemented. So were Mao's. Those guys were nuts.

Why are you still referring to legitimacy? She has no hope of ever fixing America's problems. If she thinks they're so profound, I fail to see why she wouldn't move to a country that did not have them.

Ironically, she's far too Americacentric to realize that other countries exist or that they might have similar problems.

[Nessus]

Why are you still referring to legitimacy? She has no hope of ever fixing America's problems. If she thinks they're so profound, I fail to see why she wouldn't move to a country that did not have them.

Ironically, she's far too Americacentric to realize that other countries exist or that they might have similar problems.

Your political nihilism depresses even me

Yes, you fail to see, that's what we discussed a few posts up. We're not Vulcan. If you want to be, knock yourself out, but don't chastise those who don't adopt your "life-style choices", as the Pubbies'd say.

[GGT]

I'm saying nothing about the legitimacy of the state's actions.

A Jew who had the ability to flee Nazi Germany but chose not to was frankly not engaging in very smart behavior.

If the US is as bad as GGT constantly claims, it's in her interest to leave the country; she's certainly not going to change it. And despite your implications there, I have no problem with criticizing a country. There are quite a few things wrong with the US (and every other country). But GGT seems to believe that every major part of the US is fundamentally broken. In that case, I fail to see why she's willingly continuing to expose herself and her children to this horrible state.

First off, fuck you. Seriously. FUCK YOU, LOKI. You pull this shit in every thread, for every idea, by every person, from every country.

Secondly, I can't believe you just said Jews with the ability to flee Nazi Germany, but didn't, were STUPID. How arrogant ARE you?

Third, it's not from my own peculiar idea that "every major part of the US is fundamentally broken". The people within every major economic sector have SAID SO. Name me ONE area that is working optimally, Loki. Just ONE. Education, Healthcare, Business, Technology, Finance, Government.....name ONE sector that meets or exceeds expectations. Not just by profits but also making our nation better for the most people.

It's especially egregious for you to suggest that Americans can't use criticism to improve our country, or that it somehow means we should LEAVE our country if we find things to criticize. What makes you think I can't be part of change unless I LEAVE? What kind of fascist are you?

[Loki]

No, I'm a realist. Some changes have a decent likelihood of being implemented. Others have no chance within an existing political framework. A vast majority of the changes she seeks are in the latter category.

I would argue that raising your children in an environment that you believe to be deeply flawed in every way imaginable is a form of child abuse.

[Nessus]

First off, fuck you. Seriously. FUCK YOU, LOKI. You pull this shit in every thread, for every idea, by every person, from every country.

Secondly, I can't believe you just said Jews with the ability to flee Nazi Germany, but didn't, were STUPID. How arrogant ARE you?

Third, it's not from my own peculiar idea that "every major part of the US is fundamentally broken". The people within every major economic sector have SAID SO. Name me ONE area that is working optimally, Loki. Just ONE. Education, Healthcare, Business, Technology, Finance, Government.....name ONE sector that meets or exceeds expectations. Not just by profits but also making our nation better for the most people.

It's especially egregious for you to suggest that Americans can't use criticism to improve our country, or that it somehow means we should LEAVE our country if we find things to criticize. What makes you think I can't be part of change unless I LEAVE? What kind of fascist are you?

He's a Pubbie.

[Loki]

I see she's back to feeling victimized on other people's behalf.

[Enoch the Red]

Couple this with Indiana's new bill de-funding Planned Parenthood.

No-knock warrants means the police know best. Knock-down abortion rights means the state knows best.

Yet, Indiana claims to be a Freeedom Loving, Small Government, Pro-Life state. Their governor is considered a Republican candidate for POTUS.

Fuck yeah.

Removing state funding for Planned Parenthood is knocking down abortion rights? I'm sorry, that's patently absurd.

[Nessus]

No, I'm a realist. Some changes have a decent likelihood of being implemented. Others have no chance within an existing political framework. A vast majority of the changes she seeks are in the latter category.

Depression is realism.

Of course, so long as the Pubbie reign continues, the US will keep spiraling towards a pseudo-feudalism. And you're right, the selfish and self-serving answer is to seek refuge in a nation where sanity has more foothold. But this ignores both one's love of nation, and the fact that the US is the current cultural hegemon among the NATO sphere of influence, meaning Pubbie poison will keep spreading like wild-fire everywhere in the West. So where to turn? Fascist Russia? Communist China?

Change will never happen if no one propagates it. That's entropy for you. I suppose you would have advised MLK to give it up, because it's just not realistic that blacks would be recognized as equals? Hell, they're not, even today!

(This is not to say that posting in our tree house is in any way equal to the black civil rights movement, but I am illustrating a point. Is that a 'one-liner'?)

I would argue that raising your children in an environment that you believe to be deeply flawed in every way imaginable is a form of child abuse.

This just means Evangelical nut-jobs have the right to poison their children. Or burn them alive, or whatever their mad gods instruct. This is not good social policy.

[GGT]

No, I'm a realist. Some changes have a decent likelihood of being implemented. Others have no chance within an existing political framework. A vast majority of the changes she seeks are in the latter category.

I would argue that raising your children in an environment that you believe to be deeply flawed in every way imaginable is a form of child abuse.

I see she's back to feeling victimized on other people's behalf.

You're nothing but a troll at this point. Does it make you feel less IMPOTENT by calling me a CHILD ABUSER?

[Nessus]

Removing state funding for Planned Parenthood is knocking down abortion rights? I'm sorry, that's patently absurd.

Is it the word 'right' that's absurd there? It's limiting the availability of abortions in the poorer demographics, but the Pubbie wisdom is that if you can't afford it, FUCK YOU, so no harm no foul.

[Loki]

Is it the word 'right' that's absurd there? It's limiting the availability of abortions in the poorer demographics, but the Pubbie wisdom is that if you can't afford it, FUCK YOU, so no harm no foul.

If this was an issue the left really cared about, do you really think some leftist billionaires wouldn't step up and offer to pay for these services? The reality is that this is a wedge issue for both sides of the political spectrum. No one gives a damn about poor women having abortions.

[GGT]

Removing state funding for Planned Parenthood is knocking down abortion rights? I'm sorry, that's patently absurd.

Feel free to post in the thread about babies and poor parents.

[Nessus]

If this was an issue the left really cared about, do you really think some leftist billionaires wouldn't step up and offer to pay for these services? The reality is that this is a wedge issue for both sides of the political spectrum. No one gives a damn about poor women having abortions.

I give a damn!

Aside from the detested Soros, how many left billionaires are there in the US? Krugman argues that there's no Left left in the US.

[Loki]

I give a damn!

Aside from the detested Soros, how many left billionaires are there in the US? Krugman argues that there's no Left left in the US.

Quite a few.

http://blogs.forbes.com/clareoconnor...a-energy-fight

So how hard would it be for them to come together and create a fund for women who need abortion in conservative states? The same people who can spent tens of millions in political advertising on abortion doesn't seem to want to spend those same tens of millions to help poor women obtain those abortions. I wonder why.