I Can’t Justify Many, even if the Suspect are Guilty
Another week, another police shooting, this one in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, not far from where I make my home. As I write this a massive anti-police protest is being planned, and let’s hope they remain peaceful.
Whether the suspect was guilty or not remains to be seen.
Yes, in real life, I want to see peaceful protest, as violent protest almost always leads to unintended consequences.
Wait, Todd, isn’t Lord of Columbia including violent clashes with police?
Yes, but Lord of Columbia is a product of my imagination. It’s a book, not a manifesto. A freedom manifesto, yes, but it’s a trilogy, with some new-adult entertainment in a contemporary fantasy world.
Anyway, back to real life, where things are about to get real.
I’ve been demonized by most in my family and friends network for my thoughts regarding police, which I’ll be honest I’m no fan of.
Okay, so why am I against police, especially police shootings on unarmed suspects?
For one, police are hired to enforce laws, not just natural law that protects citizens’ rights, but for instance let’s say if legislation passed an anti-gun law, police would start confiscating tomorrow, at gunpoint, mind you.
And the same cop would turn his gun on you if you resisted.
Also, if someone happens to steal something from you when you have your back turned, I’ve heard from primary sources police never provide much help and they rarely recover the stolen item. But if you’re going a few miles over the speed limit and the cop hasn’t met their daily quota, watch out.
But police shoot suspects all the time, even if they’re unarmed. Even without due process.
So, when I say they enforce the law, it could be as unconstitutional as it can get, and the law will still be enforced.
The police don’t care.
Well, Todd, that’s because they have a job to do and they’d be fired if they don’t do their job.
Right, fantastic, so again, Mr. Gun Rights (and I love gun rights) who also says respect authority and obey the law, let’s go with the gun confiscation scenario. Are you still going to respect authority and obey the law, even if they’re destroying the Second Amendment?
If so, I hate to break it to you, but all your claims of being a “Real American” just lost its credibility.
In fact, anyone supporting law enforcement just lost their “Real American” credibility, because unless I’m missing something, wasn’t this country built off of, oh, I don’t know, resisting law enforcement?
And those who justify police shootings?
Go back to Britain, you Loyal subjects.
Not only this, the police force is a government-run monopoly paid by the taxpayer, and if you don’t pay your taxes, well, the police will come and take you to jail, do not pass ‘Go,’ do not collect $200.
So, this government-run monopoly is paid for by taxpayers, whom the government acquires money from with the threat of jail, which will be enforced by the police if the individual doesn’t pay up, just for police to initiate conflict for victimless crimes like speeding three miles over the speed limit on a straightaway with zero traffic!
And don’t forget about those quotas, especially if a cop hasn’t hit them and they’re at the end of their shift. Ugh, I’d hate to be that driver whose tire hits the white line on the edge of the highway.
And they’ll write you a ticket which you must pay additional monies, again with the threat of jail if one doesn’t pay up!
Okay, enough of that, let’s get to these police shootings.
As mentioned in the title, I’m not stating those killed in police shootings are innocent, but in America, all criminals are innocent until proven guilty.
This won’t take too long.
Okay, so unless a criminal whips out a gun and points it at a cop, which in that case a cop shooting is justified because the criminal just threatened to take away the cop’s natural right to life, a cop is breaking Constitutional Law each time they kill a criminal.
Okay, but if these criminals are innocent, Todd, why are they running?
Honestly, some people just have a sensitive flight or fight mechanism that, when provoked, may cause their sub-conscious to go to work. So, in that case I’m not saying the cop shouldn’t use force, but they do have other options than a gun, especially if the criminal, who just became the victim because in America, criminals are innocent until proven guilty, is unarmed!
And even if they are armed, if they didn’t wield the weapon, well, it’s still a shooting and the criminal is still the victim.
So, which laws are being broken?
Well, the cop is breaking the Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution.
The Sixth guarantees a right to speedy and public trial. Well, if a cop kills an unarmed criminal, or victim in this case, I don’t think they’re having their day in Court.
The Seventh guarantees trial by jury, and if the Sixth is taken away due to a police shooting, I’m sure the Seventh is out of action by default.
And the Eighth prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Well, imagine getting executed for a crime you may or may not have committed, which is what a cop does every time they pull the trigger and fire the fatal shot.
So, who’s breaking the law?
The one being pursued may have broken the law, but without a court case, there’s zero evidence a crime was committed.
But, since the cop not only infringed on Natural Law, they broke three laws in the Bill of Rights.
At the end of the day, every time you hear of a police shooting on an unarmed American citizen, remember who’s really breaking the law by denying that citizen’s day in court, trial by jury, and if punishment is necessary, already subjected the individual to cruel and unusual punishment.
If you justify a police shooting, in any circumstance unless the cop had no choice but to defend themselves, you’re justifying the violation of Constitutional Law.
Again, go back to England, where your police overlords throw honest men in jail for reporting on a case banned from mass media that involved sex trafficking on young women from Pakistani rape gangs.
I’d like to thank all of my readers for their readership, please come back soon.