"I think it's about time to draft a bill that makes the death penalty mandatory for anyone who is convicted of killing a police officer who is in the line of duty," opined Cenci. [More]What a jackbooted fascist. "Lift a finger" death sentences, no matter what?
And "line of duty" is just another term for "within department protocols"...?
With thinking like that, no wonder they're so worried about their own security.
Hey guys--we'd like to go home at the end of your shift, too. This ratcheting up of the police state--this solidifying of the barrier between "Only Ones" and the rest of us--may not be the best way to work out our differences.
[Via Zachary G]
11 comments:
As I opined in an earlier post, it looks more and more like they're pushing us to rebellion and war.
Crotalus - it's certainly an interesting time, from my understanding of governing history: without precedent. It's interesting how politicians are whipping up fear in both the libertarian and socialist camps in the United States, as neither of the camps are particularly friendly to the business-owned-government. With traditional counter insurgency models, the government would at least make artificial concessions to opposition groups, that's certainly not happening in Washington, the opposite is happening, it seems.
I did like the link to this blog that totaled 57 police-taser deaths: I think it is worth noting that at least 23 of these deaths of these taser-torture killings occurred against African Americans. We make up about 13% of the total population, yet 40% of the taser-related deaths in America this year are Black people (21 men and a 62-year old woman).
Has anyone become aware of a project that counts police related deaths of civilians? I could use it for my writings, and I think the public could use it as well. It's really difficult to convince people that the police are violent, racist, totalitarian institution specifically targeting poor people - for some reason, the average citizen wants "facts". Organizations like "Cop Watch" tend to tally local numbers, but not national.
Behold the new calculus this would introduce:
If someone kills a cop in self-defense, surrendering peacefully would then become suicide, and killing EVERY cop to prevent capture has no additional penalty. This won't save cops, it condemns them.
Fidelity, African-Americans(whatever) commit 48% of the crimes in this country, which could account for that many taserings. That, and the cops being taser happy.
If someone kills a cop in self-defense, surrendering peacefully would then become suicide, and killing EVERY cop to prevent capture has no additional penalty. This won't save cops, it condemns them.
what he said. plus this: gangs close ranks the same as police do. it doesn't just condemn cops, it instantaneously destroys states and localities and replaces them with fiefdoms.
would you rather live under the rule of la raza, the bloods, the remnants of the LAPD, or hells' angels? so many choices! what a free country!
As it stands now, resisting a cop committing a crime still ruins your life. Measuring the effect of this becomes more difficult due to the already great impetus they have given to the public to kill a cop who is doing something criminal.
I agree with Hypnagogue. The only thing such a program would do is get some of the "hopers", you know the ones who think it will get better if we do nothing, off the fence and make them more likely to kill in defense against rogue cops.
And to keep killing until he either runs out of cops or is himself killed. It is a very dangerous ploy to leave an enemy nothing to lose. And the cops and a great many of their supporters do consider the public individual citizen their enemy.
As you know, Michelle Malkin is with us on the War on Guns, however, she wrote this:
Another police ambush in Washington state:
Just a few weeks ago, I wrote a column on the War on Cops — reviewing the past year of violence against police officers and the cultural war that has been waged against them for the past several decades.
The war is not over.
In Eatonville, Wash., two officers were ambushed yesterday: ...
which led to this posted comment:
On December 22nd, 2009 at 12:23 pm, sbw999 said:
Allow officers to respond to home calls with guns out. Mandatory death penalty for anybody shooting at a cop, whether or not injury/death results. That’s a start.
Holy extremism, Batman.
Georgia residents can resist an unlawful arrest with force, up to and including deadly force.
Quote:"In 1973, during a heyday of corruption and crime, there were about 600,000 officers and about 156 gunfire deaths. Now there are about 900,000 law enforcement officers nationwide and only 47 gunfire deaths this year -- a per-capita decrease of nearly 21 percent."
I ain't no Mathemagician, but seems to me with the number of Po-leece rising by about 1/3 and the number killed dropping by 2/3, there would be a statistical rate of decrease of more than 21%. But what do I know, I'm just a "civilian puke", not an Only One with a super hero costume and a magic shield.
I suspect that Michelle Malkin's support for rights of gun owners is more a tactical position than a principled one.
I suspect what we are seeing in the cop ambushes of late is just a beginning. Of course, it makes sense that criminals would be the first to actively plan and perform ambushes because, well, they are criminals have had experience with cops. Conjecture on my part leads me to the thought that as the cops say, "you may bet the rap, but you can't beat the ride" has become such common knowledge among our most anti-social elements that they want to get some of theirs back and in drips and drabs are starting to do so.
Because the hard core criminal element is so very small when compared to the general population, the number of such ambushes and cop fatal encounters is still quite small. However, the general public is starting to be aware of the mantra "You may beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride", while at the same time starting to realize that cops view them all as criminals who just haven't been caught yet, inferiors who necessarily are enemies of the cops (in the cops' minds, not in reality). Coupling these two new awarenesses leaves the generally law abiding public in fear of and anger at this situation.
As any organism will do, when faced with another organism they know to be a threat, he will either flee or fight. I think the general public is now beginning to perceive police as as much of a threat as they do the criminal.
Unless police put down their current belief system in their superior citizen status and their embrace of "all citizens are criminals we just haven't caught yet, therefore we may do whatever we want to them sans consequence", we will begin to see similar instances of violence against police performed by ordinary and up to that point non-criminal citizens.
Fear is a wearying thing, and once one grows too tired of it to be afraid any longer, anger replaces it. Anger when constantly prodded will invoke a response that is usually not pretty. And the public at large is growing weary of fearing their servants in law enforcement agencies.
At least, that is the possibility I see in our future. Is it a probability? I think so, unless some change occurs that lets the citizen once again view the police officer as friend rather than oppressive foe.
I am pretty good at picking up on patterns, and I see this one being drawn right before our eyes. It would be nice to be wrong, but I don't think it is the way to bet.
(ironically the word verification for this comment is "deprest"
Post a Comment