Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.6.2
Site Design by Sekimori

« Mitt Romney on banning "extreme weapons" | Main | Winchester 70 is back! »

Time magazine on police killings

Posted by David Hardy · 23 October 2007 11:59 PM

Time Magazine wonders why killings of police officers are up (although far below the high point during the urban Crack Wars).

Could things like this have some slight relevance here?

6 Comments | Leave a comment

Flash Gordon | October 24, 2007 8:05 AM | Reply

Having lived through the 60's, I had the theretofore unique experience of going through my adolescence in an adolescent period of time. It was common then to hear cops referred to as "pigs." For a while it was so common it seemed that "pig" would become a generic term for all time to completely replace "cop."

Fortunately, this stupid and childish epithet passed into oblivion. But with the elite intelligencia now embracing left-wing kook politics something similar, and more dangerous to cops, seems to creeping back.

Hoplite | October 24, 2007 11:46 AM | Reply

I would suspect that part of an increasing willingness to resist and kill police officers would stem from the increasing lack of respect for the citizenry by the police.

Citizens increasingly see examples of the police acting as a force acting outside of the norms of acceptable behavior, using no-knock warrants on non-violent or mistaken citizens, using lethal force in situations where only non-lethal force was justified, and the like. The more citizens are driven to see police as an "us vs. them" force, the more likely they are to resist.

Just my theory, but I do believe that the more willing the police are to use force against citizens, the more citizens will be willing to use force against the police.

straightarrow | October 24, 2007 3:49 PM | Reply

She should relish the experience. After all, unlike her law abiding neighbors,she gets to legally carry a gun, which puts her way ahead of rabble who aren't police. And surprise of surprises the cops show up when she calls and says she has been threatened. Not something they are known for when it comes to "ordinary" citizens.

Hell, she's got a bird nest on the ground compared to the populace. If she thinks it is scary for her, just think how scary it is for the "ordinary" citizen on his own with no means of self defense.

Damn, do I sound insensitive? Well, as a matter of fact, I am desensitized to a sub-population that has garnered for itself status far above the average citizen and often times is the more dangerous predator of the average citizen.

All out of sympathy, baby.

Flash Gordon | October 25, 2007 8:33 AM | Reply

I'm pro-cop, as my comment suggests, but I think Straightarrow makes a good point. The sort of cops that I know and associate with are all pro-gun and pro-citizens' right to keep and bear arms. If I lived in Boston or NYC I'd probably have a different perspective.

Don Gwinn | October 25, 2007 5:24 PM | Reply

No sense arguing over whether she deserves what she got for being a cop. Those guys called her "the police," but if you got in their way, they'd treat you the same way.
It's not about sympathy (although the author of the piece clearly thought it should have been.) It's about whether we tolerate the kind of people who threaten to kill a cop just for being a cop in "their" neighborhood.

straightarrow | October 26, 2007 11:09 AM | Reply

I don't think anyone condoned the behavior of the thugs, nor do I think anyone said she is getting what she deserves.

However, that doesn't mean I sympathize with her when the principles I hold to she, in her official capacity, must and will hold against me.

I would support her defending herself from these thugs with any force necessary. The difference is that I also support any citizen who finds himself in that situation doing the same. She would not. Her job is to maintain the status quo, which means citizens are not entitled to the same level of protection and defense and self-defense she and her compatriots are.

There is no argument you can make that this is not so. The law says it is. The law is wrong, but it is enforced. And it is enforced by her and the other officers of the law.

This isn't about hating cops. It's about wanting us all equal under the law. So I stand by my earlier post. She is much more fortunate than the "ordinary" citizens in her neighborhood. That doesn't mean she deserves the treatment, but she does have more and better recourse, doesn't she?

Leave a comment