Liberals defending the police? What is the world coming to?

There may be nothing more ironic than forcing liberals, who look upon overt exercises of authority with a great deal of suspicion and skepticism, to defend the existence of police departments with which they may have a great many issues themselves.

When police were first proposed, there stood a great many opponents who used the “no standing army” argument to set themselves against it. They saw it as a means illegal action could be taken against private citizens… as has certainly proven to be the case in many instances where the police were allowed to get away with things simply by virtue of BEING the police.

Yet we also have to defend “union thugs” who rush toward danger instead of away from it. People to whom the care and defense of the community has been relegated. People who hear an explosion and run TOWARD it with no certainty that they themselves might become the victims.

Yet every single inappropriate action, every mistakenly slain civilian victimized by our “war on drugs,” or simply out of the ignorance and sheer stupidity displayed by some officers in pursuit of “justice” must make us wonder what manner of serpents we’re allowing to abide within our community as well? Cops who kill deaf Native woodcarvers and walk away. Cops that kill dogs–family members–without censure.

Why do some jurisdictions have a maximum IQ for police officers? Is it because “they’ll get bored,” as some say? I’ve found that the more intelligent you are, the LESS bored you tend to be because you can use your brain to entertain yourself. And, frankly, when so much of police work involves pattern recognition, I rather prefer they be good at this particular type of intelligence.

No. I think it far more likely the case that they want limited IQ in order to prevent intelligent officers from question stupid directives.

It’s also ironic that those who will usually argue for more cops and more jails are now questioning our need for cops. They’re challenging their need of police, and saying that citizens should expect to defend themselves… even against the cops. I presume they mean WHITE citizens. And good Christians, not any of those foreign Muslim white people.

And make no mistake, these homegrown militia groups who fantisize about taking on the government are thinking about shooting cops and national guard troops. I don’t think they anticipate their “2nd Amendment Solutions” involve shooting the neighborhood liberals. “They can be rounded up after the government minions are handled.”

It’s possible for liberals to hold conflicting ideas in our heads at the same time. Ideas like “we need police to enforce the laws” but “we need to make sure the police are held to the same standards of justice as are all other citizens.” 

This is very different than “We need more police to keep the OTHER people in line, but we might have to kill them if they do anything we don’t like.”

AM I WRONG?Image

Advertisements