Tuesday, March 1, 2011


Cops are helping the unions in Wisconsin.

Now, while I am all for free speech, and I support the police choosing to support the union folks in their protest, I have several issues:

1. They were in full anti riot kit. IMO, this is a uniform. Had they been wearing civilian clothing, and not identifying themselves as police, then I would have few issues (although one might wonder about their loyalties, but that is another matter for another time).

B. Any time the police refuse to implement a lawful order...I.E :

"We have been ordered by the legislature to kick you all out at 4:00 today. But we know what’s right from wrong. We will not be kicking anyone out, in fact, we will be sleeping here with you!"

then they have broken their oaths and they should be subject to disciplinary action and/or terminated. While I am sympathetic to their dilemma, they have to choose their sides. (and this is a LAWFUL order, not an unlawful one that they could legally decide to ignore).

 III. If they choose to abrogate their responsibilities in support of the union, then that is indeed a choice that they have the right to make, they are free citizens after all, and can make the choice to side with the unions. They have a right to their opinions, and the right to support anyone they choose. BUT THEY CANNOT DECIDE WHICH LAWS THEY WILL ENFORCE AND WHICH THEY WILL NOT. It is an "all or nothing" thing here. There are no illegal or unconstitutional orders being given. It's not like anyone can occupy the capitol at any time. Had I chosen to "occupy" the capitol 2 months ago, I would have been asked to leave, and then removed, had I chosen to ignore that order, possibly with trespassing charges thrown in for good measure. 

What we have here is people with conflicting loyalties who have shown us that they will not uphold the laws nor the (lawful) orders of their superiors. And this makes them unreliable, and unsuitable to be police. In any fashion. If the police cannot be depended upon to enforce order, no matter what their leanings, then they cannot be police.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?


No comments: