24 votes

Indiana To Cops: You're Not Special

Every once in a while I’m pleasantly surprised by an act of government, with recent examples including Virginia’s attempt to nullify the indefinite detention provisions of the NDAA and the federal government allowing airports to opt out of using TSA security. Last week brought another one of these rare surprises, as Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels signed a bill allowing citizens to use deadly force against police officers they believe are entering their home illegally. Much of the response to the passage of this law has been over-the-top, if not predictable.

From the Evansville Courier & Press:

Groups such as the Fraternal Order of Police and other law enforcement organizations had lobbied against the measure. Rep. Linda Lawson, the No. 2-ranking House Democrat and a former police officer, said it will create “open season on law enforcement.”

From Stephen D. Foster, Jr at AddictingInfo.org:

“This law is basically a loophole for citizens to kill police officers and claim self-defense…and will ultimately lead to the legal murder of police officers who are just trying to do their job”.

And so on and so forth. The anti self-defense crowd is acting as if this bill is handing out hunting licenses for people to go around shooting cops willy nilly with no repercussions. In reality, the only thing that this bill does is reaffirm what John Locke called the “first law of nature”: the right of self-defense. Self-defense is the only morally justifiable use of force against another human being, and it is generally accepted in today’s society that people do have the right to defend themselves against violence initiated by others.

The right to defend oneself is consistent for all people and applies to all equally. It’s a fairly simple concept that shouldn’t require the passage of any sort of special bill to define. In Indiana however, the bill was necessary in order to overturn an Indiana State Supreme Court ruling that citizens did not have the right to use deadly force against police officers even if they believed that the officer was illegally attempting to enter their home. It’s good to see a state legislature doing what it’s meant to do – standing up for the rights of the people that they are elected to represent, and not giving carte blanche to the state and its’ agents to do whatever they please without repercussions.

Continue reading

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Good Bill

pass it in all 50 states so these stupid murdering psycho thugs get what they deserve for breaking the law and trying to hurt someone on their private property.


hurray for mitch daniels , this will enforce the fact the police need a warrant and need to yell the fact that they are police and have a warrant before busting down doors.

"He's this eccentric Ghandi-Like figure that you cant touch with the normal bribes that people respond to."
the man Doug Wead on DR. RON PAUL

Police state is NOT popular!

proactivity is spreading:

A patriot must always be prepared to defend his country from his government.

Across the pond...In Britton,

A man (Tony Martin) shot and killed one burglar while wounding the other. He is currently in prison for his act of self defense. See: http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Martin_(farmer) Meanwhile in Britton, they took the guns from the subjects, and this old lady (93-year-old Ruby Barber) was habitually being robbed. To deter burglars, she put up razor/chicken wire. She received a court order demanding she take the razor/chicken wire down for she might cause bodily harm to a potential burglar. See: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-65450/Anger-barbed-w...

Similar case:

It seems like socialists are more worried about the criminal's rights, and not law abiding citizens. It naturally seems that the democrats are following the European-Socialists path.

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James

What... No warrant you say?


Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

When cops turn into criminals

When cops turn into criminals they are subject to the same considerations as the rest of us.

"The United States can pay any debt it has because we can always print money to do that." — Alan Greenspan

Maybe they will start double-checking the address

before doing their next no-knock drug raid and accidentally shooting grandma.

Don't know why my last post was removed but I will try again

Cops are NOT special!
Everyone IS special!
Life is special!
Protecting your life and the life of loved ones is special!
That means protecting them from criminals whomever they be!
Now, if you remove this post again, I will be especially gone!

" In Thee O Lord do I put my trust " ~ Psalm 31:1~

reedr3v's picture

May this be a strong trend


49 more states!

Need to pass laws like this. Police abuse has gone too far and the law needs to make clear that citizens have the right of self defense in their own homes from everyone - cops included!

*Advancing the Ideas of Liberty Daily*

Frankly ALL corruption in govt would end instantly

if we re-instituted the lawful punishment for the violation of the Coinage Act of 1792,

Quality control measures were implemented in that from each separate mass of gold or silver used to produce coins, three coins were set aside by the treasurer. Each year on the last Monday in July, under the inspection of the Chief Justice, the Secretary and Comptroller of the Treasury, the Secretary of State, and the Attorney General, the coins were to be assayed and if the coins did not meet established standards, the officers were disqualified from office. Further, specified in section 19, the penalty for fraud or embezzlement by officers or employees of the mint, or of debasing or making the currency to "be of less weight or value" was death.

and apply that LAW to ALL sworn Civil SERVANTS from a public school custodian to the POTUS that ANY willful violation of their Constitutional Oath is punishable by the same, and extend the statutes of limitation to 6yrs after they retire from govt, as to limit any 'revolving door' corporatist larceny.

And ban capital punishment throughout the country, EXCEPT to be reserved SOLELY for corrupt violators and TRAITORS to their Constitutional Oath, after a THOROUGH Due-Process of the Law of course (hey, after all we're not GWB, Cheney or oBUSHma! LOL), something they've all forgotten about.

THAT, alone would instantly purge all corrupt lunatic govt terrorists from ever holding any civic positions of power, EVER again.


Previous Post:

Submitted by AnCapMercenary on Sun, 04/08/2012 - 10:16. Permalink

Though one would think that
the 2nd Amendment's "security of A FREE state" should've been enough to clarify that, if not, John Bad Elk vs. United States SCOTUS decision, should've in no uncertain terms made that clear.


Wow, would you believe that Wikipedia correctly points out the two different versions of the 2nd Amendment: one proposed, vs. the one handed around the States to be ratified? Impressive. Most impressive.

Good for them!

As you can see, TJ, that sly ol' dog, SAVED us and kept our sovereignty intact, by CLEARLY understanding the difference between the use of a comma to denote a conditional clause, vs. not!


One version was passed by the Congress,[6] while another is found in the copies distributed to the States[7] and then ratified by them.

As passed by the Congress:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.[8]

The WRONG version puts TWO commas, tyrannically:

1. After "A well regulated Militia," -- meaning what constitutes the existence of the Militia is the conditional clause following it: "being necessary to the security of a free state."

2. After "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms," -- meaning what constitutes the existence your "shall not be infringed." - right not to have that not infringed IS contingent upon the previous clause. [Those sneaky Congressional bastards; even then they were attempting semantic chicanery by stealth.]

Knowing this tyrannical ploy, the one that was actually ratified DON'T include those commas, making the Right UNCONDITIONAL and UN-a-lienable!!!

Thank God for the Founders' wisdom!

But for all of you who did research the origins of the 2nd Amendment ALREADY know that it merely codifies into law a pre-existent NATURAL RIGHT of Self-Defense: it does not GRANT, but merely guarantees what is already innate WITHIN you as a free human.

And of course, the much maligned "well regulated" in 2nd Amendment does NOT mean TO REGULATE by legislation, in the contemporary sense, but consistent with the phrase's universally understood usage in 18th century: as in "well regulated weights and measures" as in 'it's up to snuff,' as in 'well calibrated,' as in 'built to spec,' as in 'kept in working order,' as in 'skilled or capable.'

Literally to mean "make regular," without any difference to its correct and originally intended purpose.

Thus a well skilled armed citizenry (YOU, the Militia) is necessary for there to be "A free state," NOT "THE Free State."

The "free" in the 2nd Amend. is CLEARLY referring to "a" FREE HUMAN CONDITION, as in 'free from all forms of tyranny,' NOT 'free,' only for the sake of having a free geographical location, aka a 'nation' aka the State/the Leviathan or even respective State governments, but CLEARLY is referring to YOUR state of being, as in your own individual disposition.

And, since govt has ALWAYS been the historical purveyor of violence and tyranny in which it always gave itself arrogant aberrant powers to subjugate other humans, the 2nd Amendment was ALWAYS meant to be geared to keep the Govt in check. PERIOD. END of STORY!

The Founders, especially Thomas Jefferson CLEARLY KNEW what they were doing with the preciseness of the wording, that those in modernity claim erroneously, to be otherwise.

There's no dispute in the 2nd Amendment wording's intent. NONE whatsoever, if one truly understands history, and Constitutional context.

While it's good that the IN State law has clarified this issue, I truly wished that people simply understood their own rights and our Constitutional heritage far more. Of course, that's a hugely wishful thinking. Because IF that were so, the Republic wouldn't be on its last leg to begin with.

While Mitch Daniels is another run of the mill RINO statist, good for him and us that he signed it.

NO doubt that gun rights groups in other states are sure to follow with legal initiatives of their own.

Nevertheless a welcomed sign, even in a post-NDAA world.

Predictions in due Time...

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

Crack in the foundation

Legislation like this in a single place provides a crack that hopefully will become a chasm where liberty can flow freely.