Indiana now officially Police State

[robkelk]

I say mostly right because they indicated that in the case of domestic violence, they too were willing to throw the 4th amendment under the bus.
How does one say “it runs afoul of the Fourth Amendment” and then later agree to a partial abrogation of the 4th under certain circumstances?  Again I ask: What part of “shall not be violated” don’t they understand?  It doesn’t say “shall not be violated except in case of domestic violence” does it?

I'm not aware of any form of domestic violence that does not violate the right of the people to be secure in their persons... and I'm aware of many, many forms of domestic violence. If I was a US judge, I'd be willing to listen to arguments that entry without a warrant to protect someone being victimized is in support of the Fourth Amendment.
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012