Posted on 05/07/2020 3:54:02 AM PDT by Kaslin
> We have a history of our civil rights slowing eroding since the Wilson administration. <
I agree with that 100%. The 2A in particular is under assault.
But I just don’t see the same situation here. The gun-grabbers want to destroy the 2A, now and forever. The EPA tyrants want to control the water on your own land, now and forever. Etc. That is evil.
But these governors and mayors - their quarantine laws might be silly, and counter-productive. But it don’t see them as wanting to control our freedom of movement, now and forever.
They are trying to fight a disease, however stupidly.
That doesn’t mean I’ll give them a pass. But does mean I’m not seeing them as doing evil here - it’s not the same as wanting to control our guns, property, and lives forever.
Lawsuits needed - Civil Rights cases - politicians and minions who carry out
violations. This is where we need a MLK type, regardless of personal foibles.
The operative word-particle in LEO is “force”.
> How about when I drove down the highway yesterday at about 78 mph when the speed limit was 70. I went thru a speed trap and nothing happened. That cop didn’t follow “a lawful order”. <
Interesting. But neither did that cop refuse a direct order. The author of this article wants cops to refuse what are (probably) lawful direct orders.
But I freely admit that no one - not the governor, not the cop, not the citizen - knows for sure just what a “lawful order” is during this quarantine. We can all agree that setting a speed limit is lawful. But what about closing all restaurants in a state for two months to fight a disease? Is that lawful?
I guess the Supreme Court will have to settle that one.
If you were driving at 80 mph, he would have stopped you
When someone tells you to ride up on your horse and harass little old ladies relaxing in their lawn chairs on the beach, we expect you to say "No."
“As conservatives, we pride ourselves on our unwavering support of the Thin Blue Line”
Why?
The examples listed by the author were not lawful orders. They were civil rights violations. LEOs need to understand the Constitution that they swore an oath to defend.
Anyone who believes that cops won’t follow unconstitutional orders is a fool. The vast majority of them will.
L
Today, the "enforcement" aspect of a police officer means: "Enforcing obedience to the law." That kind of sh!t has no place in a free society.
Historically, the "enforcement" aspect of a police officer meant: "Enforcing adjudication under the law." The role of the police officer wasn't to protect people or force them to obey the law. People knew how to behave themselves, and they were capable of protecting themselves. Instead, the role of the police officer was to protect the accused criminal from a posse of armed citizens -- so as to ensure that the accused criminal was afforded his right to a trial by jury under the U.S. Constitution.
The Cops in my town went into a church and made the people leave who just quietly praying.
The cops who did this knew every person in that church. One of the cops was in my wife’s Cub Scout troop. It didn’t matter. They treated their friends and neighbors as hardened criminals.
No cop writes laws. Cops do not vote on the passage of laws. Cops only enforce laws written by politicians who are elected by the people. So next time you yell at a cop enforcing a law you don't agree with, you may want to look in the mirror because you elected whoever passed that law.
If you've never been a cop you have no idea what kind of torture your supervisor can put you through for refusing an order.
It's funny that up until now we have regularly seen cop who are bad at their jobs harass minorities, yet I've never seen Kurt write such a column until people who look like him start getting harassed. Curious.
My point, obviously having been missed, is that the cop #1 knew that I had “broken” the law and #2 decided that it was a minor infraction or in the case of this Texas Salon Owner a stupid application of an executive order and decided to “look the other way”.
That’s what I think most people want from their LEOs, not a bunch of jack-booted thugs.
OK..... point taken
I think it's pretty darned obvious that the choice has already been made.
It’s real simple. If you’re a good cop, and you see bad cops doing bad things, and don’t stop them, YOU are a bad cop. If you think you’re a good cop and do bad things, I got news for you: YOU are a bad cop. You better stop that crap RFN!
Getting there,Yup.
Well,Yes!
Yup. Many of us remember that pitiful excuse for a human being. We also remember Barr's support of his actions.
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.