Indiana's Supremely Arrogant Court

Recently in a 3-2 decision (Barnes vs. State), the Indiana Supreme Court (ISC) agreed that police officers entered a private home illegally, and that a person's right to resist illegal entry has been recognized since the Magna Carta (which was signed in 1215). The ISC has further agreed that the US Supreme Court has reaffirmed this right to resist unlawful entry in numerous court cases. However, in summarizing the ISC's opinion, Justice Steven David writes, "We believe a right to resist an unlawful police entry into a home is against public policy and is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence."

What an arrogant [explitive deleted]!

Dictionary.com defines arrogant as, "making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud: an arrogant public official." It defines arrogance as "having an exaggerated opinion of one's own importance". Justice David, as well as most of the police officers I've ever had contact with, suffers from this delusion of grandure. Anyone with a sixth grade understanding of English knows that Justice David believes that the police are always right, and citizens are not allowed to defend themselves. What a septic tank of an idea! Anyone who believes people will voluntarily not resist is insane, and anyone who thinks they have no right to resist is evil.

For Steven David's sake (I get naseuous calling him Justice) I will start at the very beginning. Skipping the birds and bees part, every living creature shares a biological imperative to stay alive. This self-defense mechanism is hard wired into our DNA, and is impossible to resist. Even the most timid person you can think of will run and hide to avoid the threat of danger. The Declaration of Independence clearly states that "to secure these rights (including the "obvious" right of self-defense), governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed". The police and the courts are supposed to "serve and protect" us. When was the last time you saw that painted on the fender of a police car? Now, with the stroke of a pen, and an arrogance the size of my beloved Texas, Steven David alleges that Indiana police officers can illegally break into my home, and he expects me to passively succumb to their police-state violence. Excuse me while I tighten my shoulder holster. I don't know what drugs Steven David is taking to muddy his thinking so completely, but they are apparently hallucinogenic. This is exactly the heavy handed type of law enforcement that prevailed in Germany in the 1940's. Where do we draw the line? Can these same illegal police officers drag you out on the lawn and execute you with a pistol shot to the back of the head? I suppose that would save lots of time and money wasted on what used to be called due process of law. I'm beginning to wonder why we bother with the Constitution at all. With rare exception, most Americans have no idea what it says, and with rarer exception, few elected officials recognize it as a limitation on their official powers.

Steve David admits that "public policy... is incompatible with modern Fourth Amendment jurisprudence". The idea that is really beyond the pale is his assumption that public policy trumps the Fourth Amendment. Once again, his arrogance is unbelievable. It is clearly time for Hoosiers to rethink public policy in their state.

More than one person has questioned the logic of me returning to Indiana at this particular time. Naturally, I thought that the next Alamo event would be in Texas, considering our state legislature's deceitful insistance on pushing the Trans-Texas corridor through in spite of widespread public resistance. Perhaps not. I guess that will depend on whether or not the Indiana police try to kick down the door of someone capable and willing to resist their abuse. Steven David has poured gasoline on this already volatile issue. It's just a matter of time before someone has a scrape with the police that generates another spark. History shows this is the only way to light the fires of Liberty.

Indiana < Supreme Court Decision.


Could this decision be any more wrong? I don't think so.  I think these are our marching orders:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Excellent comments on Indiana


The rate of erosion of our liberty is equivalent to the loss of shorline with the worst hurricanes!

FIRES OF LIBERTY


BURN BABY BURN!!!

Rally at Indianapolis statehouse (May 25th)


Michael,

Shortly after this debauchery happened, Adam Kosech had Stephen Skolnick on his show.  Although, self-admittedly,  Skolnick is not very politically active, he decided to organize a protest to be held had the Statehouse on the 25th, which you probably already know.  I'm off on Wednesday, so I thought I might go.

The only mention of a contact point was Facebook, about which I am not very savvy.  So, I fired off an email to Adam for more information.  Not only did he reply, he provided the Facebook link I needed - and said he was going to use my question on his show that night.

After he "corrected" me for my choice of a word (kahoonas) and essentially chastised me for being so Facebook-illiterate, I still had a sense of satisfaction that I had apparenty asked a question that possibly had a broad appeal.

Don't get me wrong.  I haven't missed a single "Adam vs. The Man" since you mentioned him in a previous newsletter.  This fellow vet is great!  Thanks.

Now, although Stephen David (is that pronouced "DAY-vd or Dah-VEED"?) was appointed by Daniels, I believe "our" Supreme Court Justices are subject to voter approval for their continued tenure.  I've also read David is next in line for this ballot approval.  What can you tell me?  Please advise.

Peace, 
Dan


 

2nd the before 4th


Thats all I got to say about that....

Urgent Request for Help - Gary Franchi


Urgent Patriot News: 4th Amendment Lost

We have decided that traveling to Indiana to cover the 4th Amendment Rally at the capitol is critical to maintaining our role as the independent media outlet for the Republic.

This is not something we have included in our 2nd Quarter budget, so we need to make a special request. We only need $400 for gas and hotel. I will cover the event personally and my wife Angie has agreed to help, so we don't need any additional staff.

This is an urgent request, please donate today at http://bit.ly/in-4th-rally, so we can leave tomorrow. We will post the news as always on all our news channels.

Resources:
Donate online: http://bit.ly/in-4th-rally
Donate by phone: 773-327-5829 or 202-904-2174
Rally info: http://rtr.org/event/1232
Newscast: http://rtr.org/videos/2/20015

Thank you for responding to our urgent request to provide you with the real news on the real actions affecting our republic.

Gary Franchi
National Director
http://RTR.org

This Steve David needs his


This Steve David needs his ass kicked off the bench for incompetence. His understanding of the law clearly indicates that he should no longer sit on the bench, which includes a park bench because he is a danger to society. I think he would look swell in an orange jump suit, don't you?

Now more than ever


I think the current situation here in Indiana shows that we need you now more than ever. Nothing has changed for most of, I for one will still resist, and would most likely die in so doing, same as before. I will be looking foward to your class, and hope to meet some like-minded people there. When you do make it back up here, you are welcome to eat a good home cooked country meal with my family, we live in a small apt, but we are well armed, the ole' lady is one hell of a good cook, and we would be honored to have you as our guest.(Hehe reading that back to myself I feel like I should have bought flowers or something). Don't give up on Indiana,and never let the powers that be'scare you away, there are many here willing to fight, and with each evil stroke of the Govt. Pen, many more are created. Keep your head down,your spirits high, and your powder dry brother! LONG LIVE THE REPUBLIC! Joe

Indiana Supreme Court's Blunder


I live in the State of Indiana, And I am truly saddened by what this State is becoming! But history shows that Indiana is almost always one of the first to jump o this type of band wagon!
Back in the early 20th century, Indiana was one of the first States to also makes eugenics the law and would forcibly have people sterilized under the auspices that they would produce "useless eaters", or "undesirable offspring"!!!
I thought that we were actually moving away from that type of thing and that we were actually going to be a State that would definetly buck the crap coming out of D.C.! But I guess I got my hopes up too high...
Most of the police that I know, I have a decent amount of respect for and wouldn't wish any harm on them, but since this ruling has come down, I understand that there IS a certain Sherriff that has taken it upon himself to do door to door searches in up state Indiana!!!
I hold to the Constitution, and I believe that they being law enforcement officers should comply with the Supreme Law of the Land, and if they don't then they should face an even harsher punishment than any others, simply because they know the law and are charged to uphold it and protect the sanctity of such!!!
But I at the same time believe in the 2nd amendment to protect myself and my family from harm, no matter who is trying to inflict it!!
I have made the statement to several people that I know in law enforcement that "If you come to my door with a warrant, I will be a placid as can be. But should you come in with black masks covering your face and pointing guns at me and mine, you'll have a fight on your hands"!!!
I am a law abiding person, I am also a peaceful person for the most part, but I will protect me and mine!!!!

Fourth


If a citizen did fight back and shoot back and maybe kill the people breaking in their door, the MSM would have a field day, making the citizen the BAD guy. The MSM expect us to be sheep. They know which side their bread is buttered on.

Tyranny in Indiana


We need to remember what our original constitution & bill of rights states. Any statute that comes along that is unconstitutional is that from the start. Get back to square one here. The people who take the oath to preserve, protect & defend the constitution of the US have an obligation. Purgery & Treason abound & what is the sentence for them? Let's get out & educate "we the people".

"Education is favorable to liberty. Freedom can only exist in a society of knowledge. Without learning, men are incapable of knowing their rights & where learning is confined to a few people, liberty can neither be equal nor universal. Benjamin Rush 1786

Indiana Supreme Rulings


There is much more danger facing the Indiana citizen than the Barnes case which the Legislature is currently taking under consideration in an attempt to propose legislation determining when an individual has the right to resist unlawful entry.   Two rehearing briefs have been submitted, thus far no response from the ISC.  One supported by number of Legislators seeks clarification, the second submitted by a group of scholars seeks full reinstatement.  Even an ordinary citizen such as I reading the two can see the distinctions and the loss of standing legislated upon the individual restricting the Rights of U.S. 4th and Ind. Art. 1 Sec. 11.  Two more cases are however about to cause even more damage to standing and constitutional rights in Indiana yet no media wants to cover these cases.  Klosinski v. DLGF was refused ISC transfer and determined that the individual has no right to object to the budget, rate or levy of a taxing unit unless that individual owns 10% of the value of property in the taxing unit being challenged or unless the individual taxpayer can acquire 9 other taxpayers to object.  We objected to our property tax bill levied by a conservancy district with no statutory authority to provide governmental services which are already being taxed by the County which has the statutory duty to provide the services.  Nine other tax payers do not pay our tax to this conservancy under penalty of law and seizure of property for non-payment, yet the Court determined we have no standing to appeal the approval of our tax bill by the DLGF the only entity in Indiana with the authority to approve a property tax levy as legal for collection under penalty of law.  Klosinski v. CSCD has the Appeals Court writing legislation.  According to this order paying taxes does not give standing to any individual to object to the collection of the tax or the purpose for which it is collected, the AP has determined we have suffered no harm.  So someone can take my money under penalty of law and seizure of my home for non-payment yet I have no right to challenge the collection because I have not been harmed.  In addition estoppel has been ignored, the conservancy was determined to have no authority for the same purposes in 1975.  Home Rule has been altered, a conservancy has no Home Rule so the AP has determined that also means a conservancy has no limits and can take over a power statutorily exclusively delegated to the state.  You may find useful teaching information in both of these cases.  We have filed an ISC transfer on Klosinski v. CSCD. 




Buy the Book or DVD Today!




Find a class in your city

JAW-DROPPING 8 hour immersion
into a subject you THOUGHT you knew.

Recent Articles

Witty, funny, engaging, educational, articles by Michael Badnarik.

.