The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

sigcurious · March 13, 2012, 01:09 PM

Hrm...Specifically related to the case this stemmed from, I'd say the officer was not conducting an unlawful entry. They were called to check out a couple arguing, and to me that seems to be an exigent circumstance to at least verify the safety of the occupants. However, the initial court ruling seemed overly broad as there are limitless situations in which LE might be entering a property lawfully or unlawfully.

Unfortunately to me the issue is that neither LE conducting an entry or occupants may know whether the entry is lawful or unlawful until after the fact. Hopefully the effect of this bill rather than its face value, of resisting the police is ok under unlawful entry, is that it becomes easier to gain legal recourse for such actions. Innocent until proven guilty is one thing, but being stuck in county lock up until that can be determined is another.

March 13, 2012, 01:09 PM	#10
sigcurious Senior Member Join Date: May 25, 2011 Posts: 1,755	Hrm...Specifically related to the case this stemmed from, I'd say the officer was not conducting an unlawful entry. They were called to check out a couple arguing, and to me that seems to be an exigent circumstance to at least verify the safety of the occupants. However, the initial court ruling seemed overly broad as there are limitless situations in which LE might be entering a property lawfully or unlawfully. Unfortunately to me the issue is that neither LE conducting an entry or occupants may know whether the entry is lawful or unlawful until after the fact. Hopefully the effect of this bill rather than its face value, of resisting the police is ok under unlawful entry, is that it becomes easier to gain legal recourse for such actions. Innocent until proven guilty is one thing, but being stuck in county lock up until that can be determined is another.