Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Indiana Court says police can enter homes without warrant?

  1. Nov 16, 2011 #1

    Char. Limit

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    http://www.nwitimes.com/news/local/...cle_ec169697-a19e-525f-a532-81b3df229697.html

    What? What? Just... what? What?

    Reading the fourth amendment...

    I'm pretty sure these two decisions don't work with each other...
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 16, 2011 #2
    I get that they are trying to avoid an escalation of conflict in the event the officer has a legitimate reason for entering the home. However, if the only recourse is civil action then I don’t think there is a sufficient deterrent in place to keep a police officer from unlawfully breaking into a person’s home. As to the case at hand a couple arguing does not seem like probably cause to me but I am not aware of all details.
     
  4. Nov 16, 2011 #3

    AlephZero

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    You unilaterally declare independence, and then you whine that you aren't protected by Magna Carta? Toys, pram, throw out of ... :grin:
     
  5. Nov 16, 2011 #4

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I don't see how it violates the 4th amendment, Char. Could you explain what you are seeing?

    Or more affirmatively:

    1. Who gets to decide if the police are acting illegally?
    2. How forcefully should people be allowed to resist?
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2011
  6. Nov 16, 2011 #5

    Char. Limit

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Entering a home without a warrant sounds like an unreasonable search to me. Especially the "any reason or no reason at all" part.
     
  7. Nov 16, 2011 #6
    So this says a cop can walk into your house and into your bathroom while your daughter is showering just because he feels like it and you can do nothing to resist him?

    Now I doubt he will stay a cop for long but he can still do it.

    These new interpretations are just great...land of the unintended consequences
     
  8. Nov 16, 2011 #7

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Please see the questions I added above....

    It appears to me that you are completely missing the point. The issue of what is reasonable search is not in question here. This court case is about if you can resist when the police are doing something wrong.
     
  9. Nov 16, 2011 #8
    So, if a cop burgles my home and I resist, we both go to jail?
     
  10. Nov 16, 2011 #9

    Char. Limit

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Now this is just my opinion, and unsupported at that, but I feel that any resistance short of incapacitating force (broken bone, basically anything semi-permanent, etc.) should be allowed if a police officer is trying to enter your house without a warrant.
     
  11. Nov 16, 2011 #10
    Personally if I find you in my home with out my permission or a legal warrant you are likely to be shot if you are not gone in the amount of time it takes me to get and load a weapon.

    I believe that fake badges and uniforms do exist.

    I will defend what is mine to the extent of my ability.
     
  12. Nov 16, 2011 #11

    cmb

    User Avatar

    Isn't being called to an incident 'probable cause, by affirmation'?

    Ah! That old chestnut! Don't we all just long for those good ol' days. I trust you practice your long bow once a week (and shoot Welshmen on sight, after the hours of sunset) for fear of otherwise being arrested by the local Magistrate for failing your civic duty!

    The point of the ruling is that there is due remedy against an unlawful entry by the Police, but that remedy is not to fight back. It is clearly wrong to cause a fight at the moment of incident. Any reasonable jurisprudence allows for complaints to be made, and heard, so that the aggrieved party is given audience to argue their case and seek a remedy.
     
  13. Nov 16, 2011 #12

    Char. Limit

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Given the apparent lack of willingness of police and courts to arrest and prosecute fellow officers of the law (at least in my hometown), what is this due remedy?
     
  14. Nov 16, 2011 #13

    cmb

    User Avatar

    Of course, because the Police pursue criminal cases, and trespass is not [usually] a criminal action (unless there is criminal intent aforethought). If a Police officer enters your premises without probable cause then you may seek civil penalties and compensation.
     
  15. Nov 16, 2011 #14

    PAllen

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    No, the way that is supposed to read is that probable cause is needed for a warrant. As written, there is not other basis for a search except a warrant.

    Of course, jurisprudence has added a lot of interpretation to this, e.g. hot pursuit doctrines.
     
  16. Nov 16, 2011 #15

    Char. Limit

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Oh. Fun. Law always manages to trip me up.
     
  17. Nov 16, 2011 #16

    IMP

    User Avatar

    If the entry is unlawful you automatically have the right to resist. I am not sure who these guys think they are but that is almost comical.
     
  18. Nov 16, 2011 #17

    If you do not have a warrant I am supposed to trust you are the police if you say so

    and if you actually read the quote you posted and bolded you will see that it actually means you can not even get a warrant with out probable cause granted because of sufficient evidence and that warrant is only good for the specific place items and person in question.


    , but upon is equal to with out in our current language so nobody and nothing can be searched with out a warrant AND that warranted has to be justified.

    If showing up to every call was probable cause and I was a cop who wanted to search a suspected drug dealers house I could just have my wife call and say she heard something from out in the street and she was worried.

    This has nothing to do with going into a home because somebody was screaming help.
     
  19. Nov 16, 2011 #18

    cmb

    User Avatar

    It is not possible to determine if any suitable affirmations in law were received for this purpose. But in any case, it is not at all material in regards the [correct] ruling made and reported in the piece.

    The remedy is a civil action. It would be an uncivilised society that claims it is OK to kill someone just because they made some form of mistake that caused them to be on your property without due cause. (Nor can you please 'self-defence' against someone whom you have no reason to believe is going to cause you harm.)

    I am not 'pro Police'. Far from it - the inverse, in fact. I have had my own run-ins with our locals, but I simply plodded down a correct legal route and came out the better for it (both justice-wise, and financially!). If you don't play it cool, you have already lost. It's their game. Play your hand straight and make justified claims. Claiming you have a right to beat up someone in your house whom you know is not there to do you harm is daft.
     
  20. Nov 16, 2011 #19

    PAllen

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I said none of the things you imply. I simply explained that you were mis-construing the language of the 4th ammentment, and you were.
     
  21. Nov 16, 2011 #20
    You can most certainly shoot somebody for being in your home. You also can shoot somebody and not kill them which would be the wise thing to do and how on earth do you know they are not in your home to do you harm?

    If you are in my home with out my permission why would I believe a word you had to say with out some form of proof (i.e. a warrant) and if you were a cop in my home legally and I came home and said get out of my house or I will shoot you. You would say I have a warrant I would say ok go outside I will look at it and then allow you in if you refused to comply and refused to peacefully follow my requests prior to providing legal documents I am with in my rights to use force to vacate you as I have no reasonable assurance you belong.

    If I were already home you would need a warant to get through the door. If you forced entry with out providing it I would defend myself.

    Anyone who enters my house with out my knowledge or permission is assumed to be "there to cause harm".

    This is a joke and will get thrown out very quickly.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook