re: #363 Whack-A-Mole

Yes, and I share that condemnation of those cops who kill unnecessarily kill people. But if the cops go in against armed subjects and those armed subjects either refuse to surrender or fire on the cops, the use of force by the cops, even deadly force, is not unnecessary and I have no problem with it. I say again, I have no problem with police using deadly force when it is appropriate.

If the cops go in to reassert the rule of law and they are fired upon by these yahoos, it is an appropriate use of force to fire back. These are not 12 year old kids with a pellet gun in a city that the cops are going to shoot down without even talking to. These are heavily armed insurgents who know exactly what the situation is and what the rules of engagement are.

And note the phrase “rule of law”. I’m not talking about sending the cops in over a violation of the law, certainly not a minor one like selling untaxed cigarettes. I’m talking about reasserting the rule of law period, full-stop. These guys have thrown aside the supremacy of our entire legal system as it is agreed to by every other citizen in that county, state, and the U.S. and are unilaterally replacing it with their own form of the law.

I am advocating for sending in the LEOs not to enforce one or several laws, but to reassert it in a currently lawless area.

Good enough in theory, but not necessarily best practice. You would need to build clearcut public support (which the feds do not have). And now it seems families with kids are coming and going.