Indiana Supreme Court: No right to resist..

[jdgregory84]

So the people that are supposed to uphold the law, are given the right to perform "unlawful" acts? Nice.........

[LS1Goat]

That's setting a disturbing precedent IMO.

[91CoupeMike]

You have to defend yourself even when it was wrong to begin with?

That's bullshit.

[Grimpala]

Is it time to vote from the roof tops yet?

[Wicked98Snake]

So the people that are supposed to uphold the law, are given the right to perform "unlawful" acts? Nice.........

All you have to do is wait till they're done violating your rights then you can complain to the same people who gave them the right to do this. What's the big deal

[Tannerm]

Your a god damned moron.....

TEXAS PENAL CODE:
Sec. 38.03. Resisting Arrest, Search, or Transportation.
(a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally prevents or obstructs a person he knows is a peace officer or a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction from effecting an arrest, search, or transportation of the actor or another by using force against the peace officer or another.
(b) It is no defense to prosecution under this section that the arrest or search was unlawful.(c) Except as provided in Subsection (d), an offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(d) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree if the actor uses a deadly weapon to resist the arrest or search.

This is what this moron is getting at...

[Grimpala]

TEXAS PENAL CODE:
Sec. 38.03. Resisting Arrest, Search, or Transportation.
(a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally prevents or obstructs a person he knows is a peace officer or a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction from effecting an arrest, search, or transportation of the actor or another by using force against the peace officer or another.
(b) It is no defense to prosecution under this section that the arrest or search was unlawful.(c) Except as provided in Subsection (d), an offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(d) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree if the actor uses a deadly weapon to resist the arrest or search.

This is what this moron is getting at...

So basically it's a 'shut up and take it like a bitch' moment.

Innocent until proven guilty my ass.

[Tannerm]

As for the scenario the OP had was a domestic at an apartment. Husband meets ofcrs are front door and tries to turn us away. By law (at least in TX) ofcrs must make sure both parties are safe. We make our way past the husband since we have legal bounds for being there to check all parties involved. Make sure no criminal act has occured against them. Husband pushes us out, or against a wall constitutes resisting.

[Tannerm]

So basically it's a 'shut up and take it like a bitch' moment.

Innocent until proven guilty my ass.

Tough to swallow I know... But this does not happen as often as most of yall think. The ones you hear about are 1 turd officer out of the 800,000 cops in the US.

[Tannerm]

I see these idiots on TV (DWI, Domestic, fighting there own(!), drug possession, etc) and just cringe cause the dang perception the media puts out is that ALL cops are like that when this is one bad seed in almost a million officers.

[Grimpala]

Tough to swallow I know... But this does not happen as often as most of yall think. The ones you hear about are 1 turd officer out of the 800,000 cops in the US.

Right now it doesn't happen as much as we might think, but actions like those in Indiana open up doors for it to happen more and more.

Baby steps until that last big step where we're all fucked.

[psdtech]

As for the scenario the OP had was a domestic at an apartment. Husband meets ofcrs are front door and tries to turn us away. By law (at least in TX) ofcrs must make sure both parties are safe. We make our way past the husband since we have legal bounds for being there to check all parties involved. Make sure no criminal act has occured against them. Husband pushes us out, or against a wall constitutes resisting.

SO it was a lawfull search? then whats with the law suit

[Tannerm]

From what I read it was. It wasnt a search for anything other then the welfare of the involved parties. But, laws might be different out there. So here, it was bueno, Indiana the ofcrs might have needed a warrant or something to enter the residence and secure the house. I'm only speaking on TX law. Y'all have a good one, I'm off to bed. Take care.

[Baron Von Crowder]

From what I read it was. It wasnt a search for anything other then the welfare of the involved parties. But, laws might be different out there. So here, it was bueno, Indiana the ofcrs might have needed a warrant or something to enter the residence and secure the house. I'm only speaking on TX law. Y'all have a good one, I'm off to bed. Take care.

If they were both fine when officers arrived on the scene and they were outside, you are saying they can't both agree to go in their house if nothing physical has occurred between them?

Put another way, if my wife and I were arguing over the paint color on the wall, and my neighbor calls he cops, you guys show up. Nothing physical, and we stop, tell yall we are sorry and are going inside. You are saying at that point the police have the full and undeniable legal right to forcibly enter our house?

[Grimpala]

If they were both fine when officers arrived on the scene and they were outside, you are saying they can't both agree to go in their house if nothing physical has occurred between them?

Put another way, if my wife and I were arguing over the paint color on the wall, and my neighbor calls he cops, you guys show up. Nothing physical, and we stop, tell yall we are sorry and are going inside. You are saying at that point the police have the full and undeniable legal right to forcibly enter our house?

I believe this is what he is saying.