Home security (out) law (ed)

Discussion in 'The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr' started by keepitlow, Jan 13, 2010.

  1. keepitlow

    keepitlow New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    164
    Location:
    US
  2. ampaterry

    ampaterry *TFF Admin Staff Chaplain* Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    Messages:
    8,214
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    The paragraph, quoting the law, is:

    State Rep. Sue Tibbs was one of the sponsors of a bill that makes it unlawful for “any person to willfully fortify an access point into any dwelling, structure, building or other place where a felony offense prohibited by the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Act is being committed, or attempted, and the fortification is for the purpose of preventing or delaying entry or access by a law enforcement officer, or to harm or injure a law enforcement officer in the performance of official duties.”

    The law took effect Nov. 1.


    It is only illegal to fortify a building IF a felony drug offense is being committed there, AND the purpose is to inhibit law enforcement.

    That makes a lot of sense to me. We do NOT need the drug dealers and manufacturers here in the states to have fortified bunkers like they do in some countries south of here -
  3. Trouble 45-70

    Trouble 45-70 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,703
    Location:
    NE Ar. W. of Black River
    It's illegal to manufacture drugs. Does anyone think that law will stop the dealers from fortifying their place of business?

    Wonder how many people will get in trouble for having burglar bars.
  4. zaxx

    zaxx New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Messages:
    28
    C'mon guys.
    Do you really think meth kitchens in the suburbs of OK are gonna shut down because it's now illegal to put a deadbolt on the door?

    Sorry, but I see this as a prime example of busy-body, feel good legislation.
    I'm sure this law has sent shudders down the spine of many- a bad guy.
  5. Terry_P

    Terry_P New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    2,513
    Location:
    NH
    Zaxx:
    Exactly. They are guilt of illegal drugs, intent to sell, etc. plus resisting arrest attempted murder you name it without this legislation. It is feel good with an ulterior motive. If you wish to amend the bill in future years you pass a law that says: strike "where a felony offense prohibited by the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Act is being committed, or attempted". Bingo.
  6. Trouble 45-70

    Trouble 45-70 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,703
    Location:
    NE Ar. W. of Black River
    It's a lot safer for politicians to go after law abiding citizens than to deal with people who might try to hurt or kill them.
  7. Eddie N

    Eddie N New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,192
    Location:
    Colorado
    Just another example of MT heads. What about keeping safe from break ins? Is that illegal, too? Or maybe it's the criminals making these laws so they can be safe when they come into your home to rob you... or worse.
    Elections are coming up...:D
  8. bntyhntr6975

    bntyhntr6975 Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    Messages:
    572
    Location:
    Wichita, Ks.
    LMAO! I do agree! I think that it is aimed at making more deterants and being able to add another charge on top of what the guilty person can get. Thus, (theoretically), making it easier to get them off the streets. As it is, it pretty much takes 3 felony strikes to be able to keep them away for awhile. But the more charges that can be added at once, the more "dangerous" they seem to be, making it more of an incident. And no offense to any LEO (including my LEO friends), but a locked door means more work, and a fortified entry is dangerous. Just because they've been trained for it shouldn't mean anything I guess. Most of us lock our doors. That doesn't mean that anything illegal is going on. But soon it may be used as a sign that something MAY be going on. After all, the door was locked to keep SOMEONE out.... An INNOCENT person wouldn't have any reason to lock their door, would they? Its only the guilty that lie, run, or want privacy. Sorry for the tangent rant. LOL.
  9. JohnBrainard

    JohnBrainard New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2009
    Messages:
    505
    Location:
    Gilbert, AZ
    The first thought that came to mind was this law gives prosecutors more to throw at the criminals, keeping them locked up longer. I can see where it might be easy to remove the "and the fortification is for the purpose of preventing or delaying entry or access by a law enforcement officer" section and that would be a concern.
  10. Eddie N

    Eddie N New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,192
    Location:
    Colorado
    If somebody kicks in my door, they better have a very good reason.
  11. CampingJosh

    CampingJosh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    Messages:
    5,442
    Location:
    Indiana
    This seems to me like it's a way to stack another felony count on top. If they're arrested for one felony (manufacturing a drug), they get X number of years in prison. If they're arrested for two, then it's going to be more time behind bars.

    Not all laws are for deterrance. Some are to punish criminals. And like Terry pointed out, it's only illegal to fortify a house if you're making drugs there.
  12. ampaterry

    ampaterry *TFF Admin Staff Chaplain* Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    Messages:
    8,214
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    Exactly -

    Thinking that sometime in the future they may strike sections of the law to make it illegal to fortify ANY building is similar to being opposed to laws against hit-and-run drivers because sometime in the future they might remove the 'hit' part and arrest anyone driving their car down the road.

    This law might also widen the net a little, in that the person doing the fortifying is now breaking the law in addition to the one that is caught with the drugs in their possession -
  13. zaxx

    zaxx New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2009
    Messages:
    28
    Okay, I get the part about stacking felony charges to widen the net/ add more time, etc.
    Using that logic, why doesn't Ms. Tibbs introduce legislation that makes it a felony to flush the toilet in a meth kitchen or crack house. Aside from the destruction of evidence argument, it's being learned chemicals used in the illegal production of street drugs are having a hazardous affect on sanitation systems, which in turn have the potential to create health issues for the rest of us.
    My point is this: There are far too many avenues for bad guys to plead out and weasel away from the punishment due them. Instead of the "feel good" stuff, ratchet-up the punishment for these crimes and eliminate the grey areas in the system.
  14. ampaterry

    ampaterry *TFF Admin Staff Chaplain* Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    Messages:
    8,214
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    Hey, you will get no argument out of me for that suggestion!
    Give pushers and manufacturers the death panalty, and I would agree!

    But the bleeding hearts will never go for it -
  15. ampaterry

    ampaterry *TFF Admin Staff Chaplain* Staff Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2008
    Messages:
    8,214
    Location:
    West Tennessee
    In the movie "Red Heat", Arnold and Belushi were discussing the drug problem.
    Arnold explained how the Chinese fixed it:
    "Line up all drug pusher and drug user in city square, and shoot in back of head!"

    Belushi liked that suggestion, but then added:
    "Never work here - the (bleeping) politicians would never go for it!"

    Arnold replied:
    "Shoot them first!"
Similar Threads
Forum Title Date
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Executive Order -- Establishing the White House Homeland Security Partnership Council Oct 28, 2012
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Department of Homeland Security's Non-Enforcement Policy Sep 15, 2010
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Homeland Security's New Truck... Mar 18, 2004
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr West Palm Beach Homeowner Shoots and Kills Burglary Suspect Jun 5, 2014
The Fire For Effect and Totally Politically Incorr Hailey, Idaho Cancels Hometown Celebration For Bergdahl Jun 4, 2014

Share This Page