Page 20 of 20 FirstFirst ... 101617181920
Results 286 to 289 of 289
  1. #286
    Joined
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    7,743

    Re: Big Brother Thread

    Court: No right to resist illegal cop entry into home

    This is the second major Indiana Supreme Court ruling this week involving police entry into a home.

    On Tuesday, the court said police serving a warrant may enter a home without knocking if officers decide circumstances justify it. Prior to that ruling, police serving a warrant would have to obtain a judge's permission to enter without knocking.
    Tyan S5397 2x X5450 16GB - SuperMicro H8DCI 2x 275 8GB - Iwill DK8X 2x Opteron 250 2GB


    Take a Kid FISHING!

  2. #287
    Joined
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Age
    35
    Posts
    2,751

    Re: Big Brother Thread

    ^^^

    It's only going to get worse.

  3. #288
    Joined
    Jun 2004
    Location
    In a house
    Posts
    5,755

    Re: Big Brother Thread

    ^^^ been that way for years in Indiana if a cop wants to enter your home they walk right in they are betting you dont have the thousands to fight it in court. Indiana has other laws that are "officer discretion" laws meaning if you are trapped or hemmed up by one of these laws not even the best lawyer in the land can get you off. Most are laws like public intoxication or driving under the influence( not the same as driving while intoxicated) if they think you are impaired there is no way out of it period.


    this is one of many reasons WHY this ruling went down A police officer paid for entering unlawfully with his life shot dead for violating this mans rights later Mr Sanders the home owner sued and won

    http://in.findacase.com/research/wfr...066.SIN.htm/qx
    Last edited by /\/\adGamer; 05-22-2011 at 12:49 PM.

  4. #289
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,266

    Re: Big Brother Thread

    Good article/discussion here..

    Video: A government war on cameras?

    The rapid reduction in price and increase in quality for handheld video cameras has created a pressure point between government at all levels and citizens, especially those in New Media or political activism. As transparency in public places becomes easier to accomplish, police have reacted by attempting to intimidate people into shutting off their cameras. In some cases, they will claim that the law forbids filming of public buildings (not true) or that the audio violates anti-wiretap legislation (possibly true in some cases). Reason TV and Reason Magazine give a hard look at the reaction and the rights of citizens to operate their cameras in public:



    Who will watch the watchers? In a world of ubiquitous, hand-held digital cameras, thatís not an abstract philosophical question. Police everywhere are cracking down on citizens using cameras to capture breaking news and law enforcement in action.

    In 2009, police arrested blogger and freelance photographer Antonio Musumeci on the steps of a New York federal courthouse. His alleged crime? Unauthorized photography on federal property.

    Police cuffed and arrested Musumeci, ultimately issuing him a citation. With the help of the New York Civil Liberties Union, he forced a settlement in which the federal government agreed to issue a memo acknowledging that it is totally legal to film or photograph on federal property.

    Although the legal right to film on federal property now seems to be firmly established, many other questions about public photography still remain and place journalists and citizens in harmís way. Can you record a police encounter? Can you film on city or state property? What are a photographerís rights in so-called public spaces?
    Wiretap laws may be a problem in those states that require all parties to be notified, but thatís also unlikely. Public officials performing their duties in public have no right to privacy; in fact, theyíre supposed to be performing those duties under public scrutiny. In some cases (such as legitimate undercover work) courts might be inclined to grant some exceptions, but police wear uniforms in public for a reason. Furthermore, the presumption of privacy is greatly diminished for everyone in public spaces, police or not.

    People cannot interfere with police while filming, of course, just as they canít interfere through any other actions. But standing out of the way with a camera isnít interference, no matter how much individual officers might claim it to be. If you do want to film police officers in action, be sure to read Reasonís primer on how to do so with the least amount of legal risk.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •