What makes police defenders different from anti-police protesters

emilynghiem

Constitutionalist / Universalist
Jan 21, 2010
23,669
4,178
290
National Freedmen's Town District
Someone asked on another thread about the connection between Conservatives
and military/law enforcement. The answer I gave was the commitment to defend the Constitution.

An ad recently came out that makes a similar statement to what I said in that thread.

NRA Advertisement Features Sister of Slain Dallas Police Officer

The sister of Mike Krol points out that her brother as a Dallas officer gave his life
defending the rights of protesters who were marching AGAINST police that day.



In short, the difference between the two sides of pro-police defenders and anti-police protesters,
is the police will put their duty first of defending and protecting the lives of the people against them.

But there is no reciprocal commitment.

The people attacking and criticizing police have made no life-risking oath
to defend the rights and lives of the police and advocates on that side.

NOTE: If this one-sided dynamic is going to change to be reciprocal commitment,
I would recommend to teachers and police unions to sign agreements with the city council
and residents of their districts, where EVERYONE agrees and goes through education
and training to abide by the laws and civil process. If we all agree to follow the same laws, maybe we can reduce abuse, violence and crime, and avoid confrontations where anyone gets hurt shot or killed.
 

Forum List

Back
Top