Indiana Law: Citizens Now Allowed to Shoot Law Enforcement During Unlawful Entry

[xedniw]

(07-10-2012 03:11 PM)NowIknowWhy Wrote:  Yeah...this shit again.

Karl is that you?

I don't know you and I am not someone you know. Let's establish that first.

Second, "crap" is not the word for a critique of the Martin media storm. When the case first appeared on MSNBC, I believed the media accounts and felt the emotion of the media presentation overtake me.

But then, Trayvon's father said something about the NBA All Star game, which I had watched. I wondered why Tracy Martin allowed his son to walk to 7/11 in the dark, since halftime of that game would have been well after dark. Then the police report came out--about 3 pages worth. Someone who was far more interested in the case than I was at the time sent it to me, and I saw that Trayvon's time of death was listed at 7:17pm. The NBA game had started at 7:30.

That's when I began to question the case. I knew for a fact that the NBA game had started after Martin had been shot. The NBA halftime reference had come from the father, so I looked at his story, including the contact with the police. I started to watch the coverage more critically.

That's when I stopped feeling the emotion and I realized that the media was deliberately fanning the flames. But no one ever asked about that NBA game. That still bothers me.

[xedniw]

(07-10-2012 10:37 PM)Andrea Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 03:11 PM)NowIknowWhy Wrote:  Yeah...this shit again.

Karl is that you?

Let's be careful. No slamming other members, either xediw or KarlSchneider. Not everyone has to agree on everything. Please don't.

Thank you Andrea. I do appreciate it.

For the record, I am new to this board and don't know the past history. There are many people who are critical of the media firestorm in this case, and both NBC and ABC have had to backpedal on their treatment of taped evidence.

[xedniw]

(07-10-2012 11:30 PM)ecarina Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:20 PM)Andrea Wrote:  ...it reminded people of the Martin case.

I got suburban visions of WACO & Ruby Ridge.

Every yahoo will think it's his right to fire on police- and police will think every yahoo out there whose door they knock on may well do so.

That is, in fact, a problem with the Indiana law. I imagine this ups the ante in a way that will end up in death before the law is repealed.

[ecarina]

(07-11-2012 11:51 AM)xedniw Wrote:  That is, in fact, a problem with the Indiana law.

Not in fact yet.

[timtom]

(07-11-2012 11:25 AM)ecarina Wrote:  

(07-11-2012 10:38 AM)timtom Wrote:  So, Andrea, if you lived in Indiana and a swat team came bustin' in your front door without so much as a fare-the-well or kiss-my-ass, you'd be ok with that? Even if they were at the wrong house and killed the family dog or even a family member?

I'm of course not Andrea, but I reckon it's OK if I respond.

When I grew up, that's what civil courts, administrative law- and yep, even criminal courts were for. Not perfect- common and statutory law had to have equity- and with ebbs and flows, we worked toward more just and reasonable outcomes.

Part of this deal we studied in high school civics -it was called the social contract.

Break down the social contract- and, well- as an individual- you'll be outgunned and end up dying with your rights boots on. Or off, as the case may be.

Build up the social contract, and you build up trust- with trust comes expectations of honesty & responsibility among those in power- with expectations of honesty & responsibility comes accountability- and with accountability comes deterrence.

In a past life, I'd say "this isn't rocket science."

But now that I've grown older and come to appreciate that reason plays second fiddle to emotion- especially in our postmodern 21st Century world- all I can say is: look to the results.

Are people in nations that have an ethos of trust- of taking care of each other, are these peoples better off- are they happier individually, are they more content socially, politically and economically than people in nations where people square off- afraid of their own government?

Resenting one another.

Or pointing guns at one another.

And I'm certain that the "justice" system will bring back those erroneously murdered in the name of...for example...war on drugs.

The Police/DHS/TSA etc. have gotten way out of hand. That's a simple fact. I'm not advocating anything, by the way. But your train of thought seems to be a sort of "can't we all just be friends?"

[xedniw]

(07-11-2012 12:04 PM)ecarina Wrote:  

(07-11-2012 11:51 AM)xedniw Wrote:  That is, in fact, a problem with the Indiana law.

Not in fact yet.

The problem is a fact.

[LaughingLiberal]

(07-11-2012 11:51 AM)xedniw Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:30 PM)ecarina Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 11:20 PM)Andrea Wrote:  ...it reminded people of the Martin case.

I got suburban visions of WACO & Ruby Ridge.

Every yahoo will think it's his right to fire on police- and police will think every yahoo out there whose door they knock on may well do so.

That is, in fact, a problem with the Indiana law. I imagine this ups the ante in a way that will end up in death before the law is repealed.

I read a report out just this past week that showed that the enactment of 'stand your ground' laws have increased the number of homicides of white men by an average of 4.4 to 7.4 deaths per month where these laws are in place. Surprisingly, there has been no change in the number of homicides among blacks. I'm guessing this is the opposite effect the backers of these bills had in mind.

http://bit.ly/LICVye

This Indiana law is a horror

[TheCrone]

(07-11-2012 12:34 PM)timtom Wrote:  

(07-11-2012 11:25 AM)ecarina Wrote:  

(07-11-2012 10:38 AM)timtom Wrote:  So, Andrea, if you lived in Indiana and a swat team came bustin' in your front door without so much as a fare-the-well or kiss-my-ass, you'd be ok with that? Even if they were at the wrong house and killed the family dog or even a family member?

I'm of course not Andrea, but I reckon it's OK if I respond.

When I grew up, that's what civil courts, administrative law- and yep, even criminal courts were for. Not perfect- common and statutory law had to have equity- and with ebbs and flows, we worked toward more just and reasonable outcomes.

Part of this deal we studied in high school civics -it was called the social contract.

Break down the social contract- and, well- as an individual- you'll be outgunned and end up dying with your rights boots on. Or off, as the case may be.

Build up the social contract, and you build up trust- with trust comes expectations of honesty & responsibility among those in power- with expectations of honesty & responsibility comes accountability- and with accountability comes deterrence.

In a past life, I'd say "this isn't rocket science."

But now that I've grown older and come to appreciate that reason plays second fiddle to emotion- especially in our postmodern 21st Century world- all I can say is: look to the results.

Are people in nations that have an ethos of trust- of taking care of each other, are these peoples better off- are they happier individually, are they more content socially, politically and economically than people in nations where people square off- afraid of their own government?

Resenting one another.

Or pointing guns at one another.

And I'm certain that the "justice" system will bring back those erroneously murdered in the name of...for example...war on drugs.

The Police/DHS/TSA etc. have gotten way out of hand. That's a simple fact. I'm not advocating anything, by the way. But your train of thought seems to be a sort of "can't we all just be friends?"

TimTom, you must have read my mind.

I know as a kid, reading Anne Frank, one thought I always had was "Why the hell didn't this family have a gun? Having a gun was a crime for them, but so was having their radio, which is the charge that the Nazis used to arrest them.

Yeah, they still would have been slaughtered, but isn't that preferable to being schlepped off to a concentration camp and starved and diseased to death. (And I did not grow up in a gun toting area of the world. Far from it. But if the word on the street is that fascist folks are aiming for you, what difference does it make? I'd rather die fighting back than whimpering while they slam me around on the floor and kill my attack cats in front of me just for the hell of it.

[cornermouse]

(07-11-2012 11:47 AM)xedniw Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 03:11 PM)NowIknowWhy Wrote:  Yeah...this shit again.

Karl is that you?

I don't know you and I am not someone you know. Let's establish that first.

Second, "crap" is not the word for a critique of the Martin media storm. When the case first appeared on MSNBC, I believed the media accounts and felt the emotion of the media presentation overtake me.

But then, Trayvon's father said something about the NBA All Star game, which I had watched. I wondered why Tracy Martin allowed his son to walk to 7/11 in the dark, since halftime of that game would have been well after dark. Then the police report came out--about 3 pages worth. Someone who was far more interested in the case than I was at the time sent it to me, and I saw that Trayvon's time of death was listed at 7:17pm. The NBA game had started at 7:30.

That's when I began to question the case. I knew for a fact that the NBA game had started after Martin had been shot. The NBA halftime reference had come from the father, so I looked at his story, including the contact with the police. I started to watch the coverage more critically.

That's when I stopped feeling the emotion and I realized that the media was deliberately fanning the flames. But no one ever asked about that NBA game. That still bothers me.

In other words, he was almost home in time to watch tip off with the tea and the candy for his younger stepbrother when he was killed by Zimmerman. That sounds like a normal teenage kid to me. Zimmerman was as wrong as anyone could ever be. When you consider the fact that people are prosecuted all the time for accidentally killing someone while driving carelessly, Zimmerman needs to be prosecuted and pay for what he did.

[F. Gordon]

(07-10-2012 11:20 PM)Andrea Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 10:50 PM)F. Gordon Wrote:  AgitPop was a slightly obscure punk rock group during the 80's. I have their music on mp3. Worth a listen.

I didn't know the whole Zipperman/ Martin thing was in Indiana. That'll learnin' me not to watch the News. Dukes of Hazard re-runs are on tonight. Yeeee haaaaa

No, it was in Florida, where else? All the craziest things happen there. The original story in this OP is from Indiana, and it reminded people of the Martin case.

I have to watch how I say things. My intent was to deflect what would have (has) turned into another Zipperman / Martin thing. I see that it flew over everyone's head.

A young man died needlessly and his death is being exploited by both sides of the argument to promote various agendas. Which is why I generally avoid the whole damn thing. Too toxic.

As for Indiana? Taking shots at the police isn't a good thing. As someone has already mentioned.... isn't going to end well.