Posted on 02/13/2006 10:03:02 AM PST by roaddog727
Here comes the chest beating of the contrarians, hope you don't mind some thoughtless criticism. they'll tell you all kinds of crap about bad allegory and how they don't need no badges etc...
I at least implied it, based on my internal reaction to your word "individual" ... it was a conclusion I should not have jumped to ... mea culpa
As for me, I'm not an island, nor do have any desire to be one. I am, by my own choice, knit to the lives of those in the community I referred to in my previous post. They have a 20 year history of consistent (for human beings) trustworthiness in both good times and excruciatingly hard times ... hence my previous reference to a cord of three strands.
Not for any particular reason. I just like the thought of being an otter.
LOL... Thanks for a good laugh. :-)
I admit to being a bit of a loner and to not trusting the "community" to have all it's constituents best interests at heart. However, I have picked my friends with care and I would trust every one of them at my back.
"If policemen are sheepdogs, who do they work for? Certainly not the sheep."
Correct - they work for the shephard.
"This whole article is infused with the sort of contempt for the public and fascistic militarism that is becoming a disease among law enforcement." Are you calling the member of the armed forces of the unted states facists? If so, you best be treading mighty lightly........
Stand Fast!
/jasper
And whom do you see as the shepard?
Satan-Claus is out there, and he's just getting stronger.
'The Last Boy Scout'
"And whom do you see as the shepard?"
Certainly not me.
Perhaps the POTUS - and no, not a Republican or a Democrat. Just POTUS.
The article doesn't address the problem of the sheepdogs that want everyone to remain sheep. I have tactical training, experience and ability that far exceeds the typical COP however there are a number of places it is illegal for me to carry. A large number of police administrators are opposed to citizens being able to defend themselves.
bttt
(Wait for it....)
Ok...... I'll bite.....
Nuff said ..
Thanks for that link. Good read!
An individual Dead Corpse?
You sort of remind me of the following rule from Murphy's Laws of Combat: Be polite. Be courteous. But have a plan to kill every person you meet. That's not necessarily a bad thing, either!
Now that the grammatical lesson is over...
I would agree that said quoted Rule is not a bad thing. As an operating principle, it can come in very handy to keep in mind. Situational awareness is not only key in responding to a bad situation, but in avoiding them as well.
Now why people like me should remind of that is somewhat of a mystery. Being an Objectivist, the non-iniation of force/fraud/theft doctrine pretty much defines my general philosophy of human interaction. Play nice, and you have absolutely nothing to worry about from me. And no, I don't expect you to have to take my word for it. ;-)
I kept thinking at the time, whey weren't they going inside to free those kids? I still don't know.
Better read what I wrote again...I spelled it correctly.
My working doctrine remains to this effect: Folks can be sweet and nice around me or they'll get JUNGLE...all the way. My feeling is that if somebody else opens the door to violence, well then, they have no legitimate beef if they get more violence than they bargained for. Sound right?
Spot on. Without someone initiating first, it's all puppy-dogs and butterflies. While some caution a measured response to aggression, I'm for out right annihilation. After all, if you are willing to initiate force against someone once, chances are you'll do it again. Consider it chlorine for the gene pool.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.