[1rudeboy]

Because, as this thread demonstrates, some posters will defend anything a government employee does, whether justified or not, because of his occupation.

Well, that's one way of looking at it--another way would be that boneheaded comments about cops generate some push-back.

Fact of the matter is, you appear to be objecting that others don't show your bias. So let's set some ground rules, if you wish to go forward.

1. off-duty cop is involved* in an accident
2. young girl is injured
3. off-duty cop is injured
4. off-duty cop is attacked by girl's father
5. father is shot dead by off-duty cop

It really is mysterious that you wish to make this about "some posters [defending] anything a government employee does." Really.

As an aside, I didn't pick-up on that vibe . . . but I may have missed it. Can you refer me to some specific comments? Unless you've confused the claim that the shooting was justified with a blanket assumption that doing so makes one an uncritical defender of government employees. In which case, don't bother.

_____
*I stipulated earlier that we can assume, for the purpose of argument, that the off-duty cop was negligent.

[JohnGerald]

Its pretty obvious that particular poster has an irrational hatred of the police, and assumes that if he throws out the magic talisman "government employee" he is going to get everyone to automatically on his side.

It strikes me as absolutely delusional, and moreover, hypocritical, as he is using the off duty police officer's status as a "government employee" to automatically condemn him, regardless of the facts.

What we do know from the news story is this:

The officer laid his bike down to avoid hitting the kids.

The officer was injured from the accident.

The officer immediately began trying to give first aid.

The officer was attacked.

The officer defended himself.

I don't see how anyone who claims to support conservative causes, the right to self defense (which a "government employee" still has), or the Second Amendment, can categorically and unjustifiably attack what the officer did, unless there was some underlying delusion and irrational hatred of the police.

On this point, looking through the posting history of the OP reveals much. Virtually every story he posts on FR deals with an attack on the police. Usually in the context relating to the shooting of a dog.

I assume that the poster has had a bad run-in with the police and thus feels that he can regain dignity and empowerment by posting hit and run comments on message boards (keyboard warrior syndrome).

Why else would one post a story from a year ago in a news forum? One in which there appears to be little controversy other than in the mind of the OP?