**Sigh**

I live in Indiana too... I really hope some idiot does NOT try to do that shit with me.

Sec. 4. (a) The executive board may, by an affirmative vote of a majority of its members, adopt reasonable rules on behalf of the state department to protect or to improve the public health in Indiana.    (b) The rules may concern but are not limited to the following:        (1) Nuisances dangerous to public health.        (2) The pollution of any water supply other than where jurisdiction is in the water pollution control board and department of environmental management.        (3) The disposition of excremental and sewage matter.        (4) The control of fly and mosquito breeding places.        (5) The detection, reporting, prevention, and control of diseases

If you look around the guy was digging a new septic system probably without a permit.

Would be interesting to see what the courts in IN think

EPOCH  

from the guy's ebay auction:

"PAYMENT ACCEPTED: Gold or silver coin or bullion making up the $22,000.00"


He's a lunatic

Quoted: It pisses me off that the Cop didn't escort her off the property.that is like 30min west of me. i found more herecgi.ebay.com/Unlawfully-condemned-2-2-Acres-in-NW-Laporte-Indiana_W0QQitemZ230018247410QQihZ013QQcategoryZ1607QQcmdZViewItem#ebayphotohosting

thanks for the ebay link.  apparently he did try to take it to court, but didn't get very far... and now the property is condemned

The guy is definatly looney. However evicting him is going a little too far.

That's bullshit, both that jbt and bitch should've been slapped with a lawsuit.

I hate this fucking state

Quoted: He should have shot them both.

GREAT BIG PLUS MOTHER FUC*ING 1

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: He should have shot them both. Why shoot the police officer? Because he wasn't doing his job? That's kinda stupid. Well, if you are gonna shoot the broad, I doubt the LEO would just stand there and chuckle.

the officer was also tresspassing in the video the man states that the posts that mark his line is 20 feet into the road. they were standing at the end of his driveway. they were all tresspassing.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: He should have shot them both. Why shoot the police officer? Because he wasn't doing his job? That's kinda stupid. Well, if you are gonna shoot the broad, I doubt the LEO would just stand there and chuckle. the officer was also tresspassing in the video the man states that the posts that mark his line is 20 feet into the road. they were standing at the end of his driveway. they were all tresspassing.

And, in absolutely no state in the Union is it legal to kill someone for trespassing on your property.

Try to calm down.

It would be murder to shoot either the Inspector or the Deputy Sheriff.  Get a lawyer and sue them if you want to.  That's what courts are for.

Quoted: from the guy's ebay auction: "PAYMENT ACCEPTED: Gold or silver coin or bullion making up the $22,000.00" He's a lunatic

heh with all due respect he sounds like some of our survival forum members.

Ok guys fess up what screen name is it?

Quoted: And, in absolutely no state in the Union is it legal to kill someone for trespassing on your property.

Unless there's criminal mischief in the nighttime.  Then you're okay here in TX.

In NC, that is a second degree tresspass, a class 3 misdemeanor...nobody needs to be shot for that.  In this state, a tresspasser can be repelled with escalating force, up to, but not including deadly force...ie, words, soft hands, heavy hands...  In this case, words were no longer effective, it was time to escalate.  UNfortunately, the JBT didnt know the law himself, and would most likely have arrested the property owner once he touched the inspector.

I'm guessing there is much,much more to this story to get this guys property condemned.

I can't quite figure out if a public health inspector has to have a warrant to come on your properlty to inspect septic tank work or whatever it is he was up to?  

How can a wildlife officer cross 10 property lines including mine to see if I have a proper hunting license?  Other than the fact that they have a gun

The post about wide open spaces got me wondering if the earth work going on was clearly enough probable cause to come have a look.  

Would the Sheriff or inspector be justified in telling the property owner to stop work immediately while they went to get a warrant?  And if he refused to stop working on the "project" would that have been "probable cause" to justify an inspection to see if he was violating codes?

I dont know - I think there is more to this issue than on that 9 minutes of tape and I think the inspector and Sheriff could have acted more professionally and persued a warrant.  

Quoted: thanks for the ebay link.  apparently he did try to take it to court, but didn't get very far... and now the property is condemned

Condemned for what?

Can your property be condemned for building something without a permit?

Sounds to me that some developer wanted his prime land and they have been trying to get him off it for quite some time. he doesn't sound like the smartest guy so they eventually found a way to do it.

If he was digging an illegal septic then all that should have happened should have been for him to get a fine and to have to redo it the correct way. Now maybe he refused and that is why it came to this. Hard to tell from 8 minutes of video.

Quoted: He's a lunatic

Of course, however, that does not give the government the right to infringe his 4th Amd. rights.

Quoted: Quoted: He's a lunatic Of course, however, that does not give the government the right to infringe his 4th Amd. rights.

naturally....but I'm not sure if his rights were actually violated.

In a perfect world, he should have been able to shoot the bitch....what part of "This is private property, and I am not giving you permission to come on to it without a warrant" didn't she and Barney Fife understand?

Sounds reasonable, if they had a reason, they should have been able to get a warrant saying so, otherwise they should stay the fuck of peoples land....

Quoted: naturally....but I'm not sure if his rights were actually violated.

The missing piece of evidence is the state statute that the gov't used to defend itself in court. Maybe a LexisNexus search is in order for this guy's case.

Quoted: Quoted: thanks for the ebay link.  apparently he did try to take it to court, but didn't get very far... and now the property is condemned Condemned for what? Can your property be condemned for building something without a permit?

I redid my septic this winter. It had to be checked out by the health department before it was covered up. No check= no approval= no living in the house and using the unapproved septic system.

Quoted: Quoted: thanks for the ebay link.  apparently he did try to take it to court, but didn't get very far... and now the property is condemned Condemned for what? Can your property be condemned for building something without a permit?

no idea, all i know is that in the ebay auction he says the property has been condemned

Where's the ACLU??

(Sigh...)

Quoted: Just take them to court.

The People's Court!

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: He should have shot them both. Why shoot the police officer? Because he wasn't doing his job? That's kinda stupid. Well, if you are gonna shoot the broad, I doubt the LEO would just stand there and chuckle. the officer was also tresspassing in the video the man states that the posts that mark his line is 20 feet into the road. they were standing at the end of his driveway. they were all tresspassing. And, in absolutely no state in the Union is it legal to kill someone for trespassing on your property. Try to calm down. It would be murder to shoot either the Inspector or the Deputy Sheriff.  Get a lawyer and sue them if you want to.  That's what courts are for.

with all due respect if you look at the link above he took them to court and it did not turn out so well.  what do you do when the system fails you and continues to employ the same jackasses that violate these peoples rights and probably train others to do the same thing? the world would be a much better place without that Cant Undertstand Normal Thinking and her lazy ass state paid watchdog.


ETA because i cant type

Quoted: Quoted: I'd like to know how that came out. I hope that dude got a lot of money. The statement he made "your going to make me rich" will damage his case.

Wouldn't seem to help his cause. I guess the lesson is, when you have a video camera you are not talking to the people you are taping, you are talking to the jury.

Quoted: In order for her to be authorized to enter his property w/o warrant or consent, she has to be able to articulate some sort of exigent circumstance that needs to be immediately addressed     or corrected in order to prevent or mitigate a clear and present danger to any person. Circumstances that if presented to a judge for a warrant would definitely result in a warrant being issued allowing entry. There did not seem to be such a circumstance in this case...

Agreed.

Best "exigent circumstance" reasoning I can find:

IC 16-20-1-23 Inspection of private property; property in which officer has interest     Sec. 23. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b), the local health officer or the officer's designee may enter upon and inspect private property, at proper times after due notice, in regard to the possible presence, source, and cause of disease. The local health officer or designee may order what is reasonable and necessary for prevention and suppression of disease and in all reasonable and necessary ways protect the public health.    (b) However, a local health officer, or a person acting under the local health officer, shall not inspect property in which the local health officer has any interest, whether real, equitable, or otherwise. Any such inspection or any attempt to make such inspection is grounds for removal as provided for in this article.    (c) This section does not prevent inspection of premises in which a local health officer has an interest if the premises cannot otherwise be inspected. If the premises cannot otherwise be inspected, the county health officer shall inspect the premises personally.

Of course, the section in red pretty much negates her authority to trespass unless there was some sort of open latrine on the property.

Quoted: with all due respect if you look at the link above he took them to court and it did not turn out so well.

I wonder why?

Could it be that he violated the law by installing a sewage system that was not properly inspected and approved?

Could it be that the law plainly states that if you do this, your property will be condemned?

what do you do when the system fails you

The system didn't fail him.  He failed himself by ignoring building restrictions and violating building code laws.

He has no one to blame but himself.

and continues to employ the same jackasses that violate these peoples rights and probably train others to do the same thing? the world would be a much better place without that Cant Undertstand Normal Thinking and her lazy ass state paid watchdog. ETA because i cant type

Are you sure that she broke the law?  Are you sure that state law there does not give her authority to physically inspect a property to assure that state building codes are being followed?

Without knowing their state laws, it would seem to me that a warrant would have made all this much simpler.  But, it also seems that this guy took his case to court and lost his argument.

Now his property is condemned.  And he's still a fruitcake.

How come the ARFcom solutions to most situations are "draw down" or "shoot, shovel, shutup"?

"Kid shot a paintball gun at me." Answer: "kill him."
"Neighbor's cat keeps getting into my yard." Answer: "shoot the cat."
"Old lady next door is mowing part of my lawn." Answer: "draw down on her."
"Couple next door is arguing loudly in their back yard." Answer: "draw down on both of them."

You guys seriously lack some basic conflict resolution skills.

The homeowner asked multiple times in the video "what is your probable cause?" The woman Inspector never responded to that question. If she felt the landowner had installed a septic tank that was not installed according to code, why didn't she simply state that?

Quoted: Quoted: with all due respect if you look at the link above he took them to court and it did not turn out so well. I wonder why? Could it be that he violated the law by installing a sewage system that was not properly inspected and approved? Could it be that the law plainly states that if you do this, your property will be condemned?  what do you do when the system fails you The system didn't fail him.  He failed himself by ignoring building restrictions and violating building code laws. He has no one to blame but himself. and continues to employ the same jackasses that violate these peoples rights and probably train others to do the same thing? the world would be a much better place without that Cant Undertstand Normal Thinking and her lazy ass state paid watchdog. ETA because i cant type Are you sure that she broke the law?  Are you sure that state law there does not give her authority to physically inspect a property to assure that state building codes are being followed? Without knowing their state laws, it would seem to me that a warrant would have made all this much simpler.  But, it also seems that this guy took his case to court and lost his argument. Now his property is condemned.  And he's still a fruitcake.

good points all i can see is this guys side of the story. if i could get some info from the other side i could make a more informed desicion. i have no idea what he was building or the condition of the land he is building on. she may have been in the right. however from the video both the inspector and the peace officer were guilty of being assholes for sure. and the video is what i made my judgement on granted that judgement was slightly skewed by emotion (because of the actions of the govenment employees).


lessons learned  i need to get more info before running off at the black hole above my chin.

i still think i would not have stood by and let her just walk on my property without a verygood reason which was never given. and as a result i very well may have endded up in cuffs but thats just me.

Quoted: How come the ARFcom solutions to most situations are "draw down" or "shoot, shovel, shutup"? "Kid shot a paintball gun at me." Answer: "kill him." "Neighbor's cat keeps getting into my yard." Answer: "shoot the cat." "Old lady next door is mowing part of my lawn." Answer: "draw down on her." "Couple next door is arguing loudly in their back yard." Answer: "draw down on both of them." You guys seriously lack some basic conflict resolution skills.

Very astute observation.

However, I wouldn't call it an "ARFcom solution", I would call it a "small minority of inmature posters" solution.

Mature and level-headed members here know that you can't solve problems such as this by using a firearm.

Quoted: The homeowner asked multiple times in the video "what is your probable cause?" The woman Inspector never responded to that question. If she felt the landowner had installed a septic tank that was not installed according to code, why didn't she simply state that?

Once again, I am only guessing here, but if she had authority, by state law, to inspect sewage systems to verify that they were in compliance with the law, then she needed no "probable cause".

She might have seen a hole being dug with a backhole, seen a ceptic tank sitting by the hole, and made an assumption that he was installing it.  Or, much more probable, a neighbor called the Inspector because they didn't want this guy installing an improper system.

Regardless, she had probably been taught not to argue with a nutcase like this guy.  Just take some photos of the illegal installation and write a report and file the case.

That's what she did.

Quoted: How come the ARFcom solutions to most situations are "draw down" or "shoot, shovel, shutup"? "Kid shot a paintball gun at me." Answer: "kill him." "Neighbor's cat keeps getting into my yard." Answer: "shoot the cat." "Old lady next door is mowing part of my lawn." Answer: "draw down on her." "Couple next door is arguing loudly in their back yard." Answer: "draw down on both of them." You guys seriously lack some basic conflict resolution skills.

The most concise logic and common sense I have seen on here in a long time.  I'm tired of the drawn down, survivalist type know it all's on this board.  You give the rest of us weapon owners a bad name.

Quoted: good points all i can see is this guys side of the story. if i could get some info from the other side i could make a more informed desicion. i have no idea what he was building or the condition of the land he is building on. she may have been in the right. however from the video both the inspector and the peace officer were guilty of being assholes for sure. and the video is what i made my judgement on granted that judgement was slightly skewed by emotion (because of the actions of the govenment employees). lessons learned  i need to get more info before running off at the black hole above my chin. i still think i would not have stood by and let her just walk on my property without a verygood reason which was never given. and as a result i very well may have endded up in cuffs but thats just me.

You make an excellent point.......Never make a judgement without knowing all the facts.

I watched the video and was disappointed in many parts of it.  The Deputy seemed unsure of what the law required.  Did you notice that he let the Inspector go on the property, but he himself did not?  He ought to have known what to do, but it seems that he didn't.

As far as "letting her walk on my property", what would have been reasonable?  It did the land owner no harm.  His life was not in danger.  He was not allowed to use deadly force.

A physical contact with the female Inspector would only have resulted in his arrest.  He did better to just make a video of what happened.  Turns out that that didn't help him, so it must have been legal for her to make such an inspection.

When I was a new police officer, we once talked to a complaintant who told us all kinds of bad things the other party had done.  As we walked away I asked my training officer, "Are we going to arrest (the other guy)?"

He stopped and turned to me and laughed and said, "We've only heard half of the story."

Turns out there was another story to be told.

Always suspect that there are two sides to any story.

Quoted: Quoted: How come the ARFcom solutions to most situations are "draw down" or "shoot, shovel, shutup"? "Kid shot a paintball gun at me." Answer: "kill him." "Neighbor's cat keeps getting into my yard." Answer: "shoot the cat." "Old lady next door is mowing part of my lawn." Answer: "draw down on her." "Couple next door is arguing loudly in their back yard." Answer: "draw down on both of them." You guys seriously lack some basic conflict resolution skills. Very astute observation. However, I wouldn't call it an "ARFcom solution", I would call it a "small minority of inmature posters" solution. Mature and level-headed members here know that you can't solve problems such as this by using a firearm.

No, I think most people cannot understand HYPERBOLE.....

Look, in a country where an individuals rights are being eroded all the time by a gov running roughshod, people are pissed, and tend to use some hyperbole to express their dissatisfaction....

As I said, I a perfect world, he would have been free to gut shoot the bitch and leave her to die. She was being a bitch, and trespassing, after repeatedly being told to stay off the property.

In my perfect world property IS worth defending by all means, whether it is your land, or a pencil off your desk at home, or your TV....

In a world without consequence, more deadly force might help thing turn around...

i.e. Kid shoots you with paintball gun, you draw down and kill kid...shows other kids that there are repercussions for actions, sometimes deadly...maybe next time kids won't shoot people with paintballs...now, generally the most they would get is a slap on the wrist, so they feel they can do anything with impunity....

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: How come the ARFcom solutions to most situations are "draw down" or "shoot, shovel, shutup"? "Kid shot a paintball gun at me." Answer: "kill him." "Neighbor's cat keeps getting into my yard." Answer: "shoot the cat." "Old lady next door is mowing part of my lawn." Answer: "draw down on her." "Couple next door is arguing loudly in their back yard." Answer: "draw down on both of them." You guys seriously lack some basic conflict resolution skills. Very astute observation. However, I wouldn't call it an "ARFcom solution", I would call it a "small minority of inmature posters" solution. Mature and level-headed members here know that you can't solve problems such as this by using a firearm. No, I think most people cannot understand HYPERBOLE..... Look, in a country where an individuals rights are being eroded all the time by a gov running roughshod, people are pissed, and tend to use some hyperbole to express their dissatisfaction.... As I said, I a perfect world, he would have been free to gut shoot the bitch and leave her to die. She was being a bitch, and trespassing, after repeatedly being told to stay off the property. In my perfect world property IS worth defending by all means, whether it is your land, or a pencil off your desk at home, or your TV.... In a world without consequence, more deadly force might help thing turn around... i.e. Kid shoots you with paintball gun, you draw down and kill kid...shows other kids that there are repercussions for actions, sometimes deadly...maybe next time kids won't shoot people with paintballs...now, generally the most they would get is a slap on the wrist, so they feel they can do anything with impunity....

No offense, pzjgr.

But that's insane.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: How come the ARFcom solutions to most situations are "draw down" or "shoot, shovel, shutup"? "Kid shot a paintball gun at me." Answer: "kill him." "Neighbor's cat keeps getting into my yard." Answer: "shoot the cat." "Old lady next door is mowing part of my lawn." Answer: "draw down on her." "Couple next door is arguing loudly in their back yard." Answer: "draw down on both of them." You guys seriously lack some basic conflict resolution skills. Very astute observation. However, I wouldn't call it an "ARFcom solution", I would call it a "small minority of inmature posters" solution. Mature and level-headed members here know that you can't solve problems such as this by using a firearm. No, I think most people cannot understand HYPERBOLE..... Look, in a country where an individuals rights are being eroded all the time by a gov running roughshod, people are pissed, and tend to use some hyperbole to express their dissatisfaction.... As I said, I a perfect world, he would have been free to gut shoot the bitch and leave her to die. She was being a bitch, and trespassing, after repeatedly being told to stay off the property. In my perfect world property IS worth defending by all means, whether it is your land, or a pencil off your desk at home, or your TV.... In a world without consequence, more deadly force might help thing turn around... i.e. Kid shoots you with paintball gun, you draw down and kill kid...shows other kids that there are repercussions for actions, sometimes deadly...maybe next time kids won't shoot people with paintballs...now, generally the most they would get is a slap on the wrist, so they feel they can do anything with impunity.... No offense, pzjgr. But that's insane.

Which part?

Again, its hyperbole....part of me says that might be a good way to make people think, but of course the rational side knows its over the top, and a bad idea...

Although, that bitch really set me off, I'd still like to have seen her get capped....

Quoted: [ Always suspect that there are two sides to any story.

Actually there are three sides. Each side has its version which it skews to suit itself, and the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Quoted: Quoted: He should have shot them both. Why shoot the police officer? Because he wasn't doing his job? That's kinda extremely stupid.

Quoted: No, I think most people cannot understand HYPERBOLE..... Look, in a country where an individuals rights are being eroded all the time by a gov running roughshod, people are pissed, and tend to use some hyperbole to express their dissatisfaction.... As I said, I a perfect world, he would have been free to gut shoot the bitch and leave her to die. She was being a bitch, and trespassing, after repeatedly being told to stay off the property. In my perfect world property IS worth defending by all means, whether it is your land, or a pencil off your desk at home, or your TV.... In a world without consequence, more deadly force might help thing turn around... i.e. Kid shoots you with paintball gun, you draw down and kill kid...shows other kids that there are repercussions for actions, sometimes deadly...maybe next time kids won't shoot people with paintballs...now, generally the most they would get is a slap on the wrist, so they feel they can do anything with impunity.... ---------------------- Which part? Again, its hyperbole....part of me says that might be a good way to make people think, but of course the rational side knows its over the top, and a bad idea... Although, that bitch really set me off, I'd still like to have seen her get capped....

Okay, if you're not really serious, I'll talk with you aout it.

Society, and level-headed people, wants (and demands) Fair resolution to grievences.

If you and I disagree on whether I, as a County Health Inspector, can inspect your property, Society demands a method of resolving our difference of opinion.

Society recognizes that allowing you to "gut shoot the bitch and leave her to die" is not a reasonable solution to such a problem.

If your life is in danger, society recognizes that deadly force is justified.  but not for something as minor as trespassing, with no damage to property.

The grievance and action must be appropriate to each other.

Society correctly does not allow "Kid shoots you with paintball gun, you draw down and kill kid"

That is not a reasonable response.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: He should have shot them both. Why shoot the police officer? Because he wasn't doing his job? That's kinda stupid. Well, if you are gonna shoot the broad, I doubt the LEO would just stand there and chuckle. the officer was also tresspassing in the video the man states that the posts that mark his line is 20 feet into the road. they were standing at the end of his driveway. they were all tresspassing.

Ah the voice of reason - I thought it would be pushing the envelope to physically remove the woman from the property and now people are saying shoot them both?

We definitely are not getting the full story - you have rights up until your actions begin to infringe upon the rights of others - if he was installing a septic tank without a permit, then the county was probably concerned about seepage of this guys sewage into the water table.

That said, the woman and the police officer were less than professional in the execution of their duties.  "If you don't have anything to hide" <-- bunch of crap - sounds like a member of the Gestapo.  They should have gone back to their superiors, researched and then come back with either a real explanation of their "right" to search his property with accompanying documentation or a warrant.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: How come the ARFcom solutions to most situations are "draw down" or "shoot, shovel, shutup"? "Kid shot a paintball gun at me." Answer: "kill him." "Neighbor's cat keeps getting into my yard." Answer: "shoot the cat." "Old lady next door is mowing part of my lawn." Answer: "draw down on her." "Couple next door is arguing loudly in their back yard." Answer: "draw down on both of them." You guys seriously lack some basic conflict resolution skills. Very astute observation. However, I wouldn't call it an "ARFcom solution", I would call it a "small minority of inmature posters" solution. Mature and level-headed members here know that you can't solve problems such as this by using a firearm. No, I think most people cannot understand HYPERBOLE..... No offense, pzjgr. But that's insane. Which part? Again, its hyperbole....part of me says that might be a good way to make people think, but of course the rational side knows its over the top, and a bad idea... Although, that bitch really set me off, I'd still like to have seen her get capped....

so that what its called

Serious question -

I'm not saying this would be the right thing to do, but would the property owner have
been within his legal rights to have wrestled to woman to the ground and detain her
once she crossed his property line?

Quoted: Serious question - I'm not saying this would be the right thing to do, but would the property owner have been within his legal rights to have wrestled to woman to the ground and detain her once she crossed his property line?

I qualify this with the understanding that different states have different laws.

In Texas, a disagreement such as this one is a non-violent disagreement.  But as soon as you tackle the woman, it is an assault.

The Deputy at the scene would respond to an assault and arrest you.

You haven't been physically assaulted.  You cannot respond with an assault.

Just take her to court if you feel she is wrong.  That's what he did.  He lost, because he was wrong, not her.

Quoted: Quoted: Serious question - I'm not saying this would be the right thing to do, but would the property owner have been within his legal rights to have wrestled to woman to the ground and detain her once she crossed his property line? I qualify this with the understanding that different states have different laws. In Texas, a disagreement such as this one is a non-violent disagreement.  But as soon as you tackle the woman, it is an assault. The Deputy at the scene would respond to an assault and arrest you. You haven't been physically assaulted.  You cannot respond with an assault. Just take her to court if you feel she is wrong.  That's what he did.  He lost, because he was wrong, not her.

just wondering but what info are you basing this on?  if you have other info i would like to see what he was doing that was wrong and why she was right.

Quoted: just wondering but what info are you basing this on?  if you have other info i would like to see what he was doing that was wrong and why she was right.

If you go to the e-bay link posted earlier, he states that he went to court and lost.

The county has condemned his property and he is now trying to sell it for gold bullion.

Or a ticket on a rocket ship. (Just kidding.)

Quoted: -snip- Okay, if you're not really serious, I'll talk with you aout it. Society, and level-headed people, wants (and demands) Fair resolution to grievences. If you and I disagree on whether I, as a County Health Inspector, can inspect your property, Society demands a method of resolving our difference of opinion. Society recognizes that allowing you to "gut shoot the bitch and leave her to die" is not a reasonable solution to such a problem. If your life is in danger, society recognizes that deadly force is justified.  but not for something as minor as trespassing, with no damage to property. The grievance and action must be appropriate to each other. Society correctly does not allow "Kid shoots you with paintball gun, you draw down and kill kid" That is not a reasonable response.

Well, just because what society deems appropriate now, doesn't make it right...

There was a day in this country where you could defend your property with deadly force. Cattle and horse rustling were frowned upon mightily havily....

As others have pointed out, mess around without permission on someones property after dark in Texas, and you're begging to be shot....

Of course, in this case I think he was being reasonable, he said, go back and get a warrant if you feel you have reason to trespass on my property. In my book, both she and the officer were being unreasonable.

He never said you cannot come on my property, he just asked they have a documented and approved reason why she should.

I think that would be a fair way to resolve the situation. That woman just saying she has the right, and walking onto the property after being told many times she was not welcome to do that...is unreasonable.

I would guess from the video she was there the day before, and was told she could not enter. So she showed up the next day with a LEO...but with no apparent facts, or authority, as the best Barney could come up with is "if you have nothing to hide, it shouldn't be a problem"

Instead of something along the lines of "according to the Indiana code, health dept no 123, paragraph 6, an inspector may enter the property to ascertain for the public good if certain regs are being met...."

Again, therefore, in my book, she is trespasssing after multiple warnings...again, in my perfect world, that would be grounds to shoot her where she stands....But then again, as I said, I believe my property is worth someones life if they refuse to stay off of it, or try to steal it.

Of course the reality of current modern life dictates that, unfortunately, that typically is not an option....

I don't think, judging strictly by what I saw, and keeping in mind, I am not a lawyer, nor do I have a working knowledge of Indiana law, that the deputy nor the inspector acted responsibly or professionally in this case. If he was so adamant, it wouldn't make much of a difference had they went back to town, got a judge to sign off on the legality of her inspection, and went back the next day. Instead she, with the holier than though, I'm from the gov, I'm here to help attitude, made her own rules....

Would it have been so hard for the cop to watch the guy while the inspector went to get a warrant? I don't care if the guy was burying bodies in his back yard, what happened on that video was just not right.

Quoted: The county has condemned his property and he is now trying to sell it for gold bullion. Or a ticket on a rocket ship. (Just kidding.)

Some one had to say it - somehow it's funnier when OP says it.

Quoted: Quoted: just wondering but what info are you basing this on?  if you have other info i would like to see what he was doing that was wrong and why she was right. If you go to the e-bay link posted earlier, he states that he went to court and lost. The county has condemned his property and he is now trying to sell it for gold bullion. Or a ticket on a rocket ship. (Just kidding.)

yes i read that but again this is his side of the story i want to know why he lost and was just wondering if you had any "other" info that i had not seen yet. he does not tell us what he was building/burying.