Indiana Sheriff: Let’s conduct random home searches
On the heels of a 3-2 decision by the Indiana Supreme Court to disallow resistance to police searches of residents’ homes, an Indiana sheriff has decided that he has the authority to conduct random house-to-house searches. Not only that, but he thinks people will welcome a clear violation of their Fourth Amendments rights;
When asked three separate times due to the astounding callousness as it relates to trampling the inherent natural rights of Americans, [Newton County Sheriff, Don Hartman Sr.] emphatically indicated that he would use random house to house checks, adding he felt people will welcome random searches if it means capturing a criminal.
Let’s review the Fourth Amendment;
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no Warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
What is it with these people who don’t understand those two pesky words “shall not” which keep cropping up in the Bill of Rights?
In his dissenting opinion of the Indiana Supreme court ruling, Justice Robert Rucker predicted, correctly, it seems;
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.
Not only that, apparently, government agents think that they have been given a green light by the people to kick down doors looking for a crime that the police are not even sure has been committed yet. If you click on Sheriff Hartman’s name in the first quote, the link takes you to his department’s website.
I guess “protect and serve” is just another nice-sounding slogan.
Thanks to Stu for the link.
Category: Legal
An additional item of interest, 2 Home Invasions in 3 days by police impersonators following the IND SC ruling.
http://www.southbendtribune.com/news/sbt-2nd-home-invasion-in-three-days-20110514,0,2665087.story
This won’t end well. I can envision one paranoid basement dweller + one rookie cop ordered to perform a search and the result be someone killed for no good effin’ reason other than the advancement of a fascist police state.
Inevitably, some citizen will stand up and counter-deliver The Immutable Law of Unintended Consequences.
Then let the firefight begin. . . .
‘Nuff said.
This guy is making Sheriff Dupnik look like a mental giant. And who didn’t see the “phony cop home invasion” bit coming with this ruling?
Jawold mein Fuhrer!!
Funny; I thought that the good sheriff would resemble Ernst Rohm.
So, the police in Indiana have the right to warrantless search, but is anything found in that search admissible as evidence?
To Serve their own interests, and to Protect their coffee shop security guard job. Losing respect, gaining fear for law Enforcement by the day.
Here’s the thing, I have the utmost respect for the vast majority of the rank and file officers, it’s their asshat freakin’ administration that comes up with these completely untenable policies.
The only people who protect ANYTHING is US.
That’s what the Second Amendment is for — defending all the other Amendments if / when they’re breached.
Oh, and just as a reminder. The situation in Indiana?
That’s exactly why the term used to describe that type of idiocy is “Police State.”
This decision by Indiana’s Supreme Court, and the abuse which stems from, as illustrated by this no-account sheriff, effectly castrates Mitch Daniels’s run for the presidency in 2012.
Can’t be [the Republican] governor of a police state and expect to get elected to the highest office in the nation.
Well played, DNC, very well played.
If my door flies open and ANYBODY steps through it, they GET SHOT. Period. I don’t give a shit if they are a cop or not. To those who would snivel about capping a cop, fuckit. They are not expected to make mistakes when serving warrants, they are not legally entitled to destroy private property, and they are not entitled to violate my constitutional rights. Those attempting to do any of this will be killed. Not wounded, not incapacitated, KILLED. As to this crap about civil suits being the only proper redress of the violation of my rights, bullshit. Why should I be forced to spend my hard earned money to punish some dumbshits with badges who act like a modern day Gestapo? No, my M16A1 will take care of that for me. If enough people follow suit the police will in a general manner become much more circumspect in their behavior. This ruling flies in the face of the fourth amendment which is as clear as it can possibly be about the matter. And if a cop violates the constitution, they then become a simple criminal, nothing more, to be dealt with as harshly as possible.
Well put USMC Steve.
When a Sheriff says things like this it is time to remove him from office. He has sworn to uphold the law, but now he is knowingly breaking the law. There would be no prevention by these actions, because everything would inadmissible due to the illegal entry. Just because I cannot prevent them from entering my home doesn’t mean that they have the right.