4 ms·

I'm sympathetic to that argument, but the logical next step is to say that they're also too incompetent to protect your life, and then it's the wild-west. I be

by webXL 11y ago

I'm sympathetic to that argument, but the logical next step is to say that they're also too incompetent to protect your life, and then it's the wild-west. I believe in extreme circumstances, society should reserve the right to "not turn the other cheek". Nothing is black and white. The government is not completely incompetent, and not all cases have reasonable doubt. But cases like this, no way. Define some clear-cut parameters and apply it to every state uniformly.

blister 11y ago
Isn't this already the case? Our police force, the ones with the motto of "protect and serve" are in the news nearly every day with some sort of gun crime against the citizenry [1]. We literally pay these people to put their lives on the line for us, but it seems to have become OK for them to "shoot first and ask questions later". They have lighter restrictions on the use of force than we had in a war zone in the Army. Perhaps it's time that we DO say that they're too incompetent to protect our lives. Perhaps it's time to vote for an actual change while we still have time. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_the_United_States,_2015 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforc...
Frondo 11y ago
That is not the logical next step. The logical next step is, "so the government should not be in the business of killing people." Life in prison? Sure, though I'm personally not sure depriving someone of their freedom for the rest of their natural life isn't also unacceptably cruel.
- webXL 11y ago
  "so the government should not be in the business of killing people." But as a species, we're a long way from selecting government officials who don't want to kill. These freaks crave power. And Glossip had the chance to take life if he confessed. He chose death. Just goes to show that cruelty is subjective.
tew28 11y ago
The government failing to protect a life is not the same as, or even similar to, the government erroneously taking a life.
- webXL 11y ago
  I know there are big ethical problems with my "next step", but do you really care if you're killed by a murderer or a careless police officer? Or a careless safety inspection that leads to an accident? Incompetence that leads to my wrongful conviction and death is probably just as likely as the incompetence that would lead to my death when I'm supposed to be protected. It's a hell of a lot less likely than the death of those whom I'm not-exactly being protected from, such as the countless victims of "collateral damage".

by webXL 11y ago

blister 11y ago

Isn't this already the case? Our police force, the ones with the motto of "protect and serve" are in the news nearly every day with some sort of gun crime against the citizenry [1]. We literally pay these people to put their lives on the line for us, but it seems to have become OK for them to "shoot first and ask questions later". They have lighter restrictions on the use of force than we had in a war zone in the Army. Perhaps it's time that we DO say that they're too incompetent to protect our lives. Perhaps it's time to vote for an actual change while we still have time. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_the_United_States,_2015 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforc...

Frondo 11y ago

That is not the logical next step. The logical next step is, "so the government should not be in the business of killing people." Life in prison? Sure, though I'm personally not sure depriving someone of their freedom for the rest of their natural life isn't also unacceptably cruel.

webXL 11y ago
"so the government should not be in the business of killing people." But as a species, we're a long way from selecting government officials who don't want to kill. These freaks crave power. And Glossip had the chance to take life if he confessed. He chose death. Just goes to show that cruelty is subjective.

tew28 11y ago

The government failing to protect a life is not the same as, or even similar to, the government erroneously taking a life.

webXL 11y ago
I know there are big ethical problems with my "next step", but do you really care if you're killed by a murderer or a careless police officer? Or a careless safety inspection that leads to an accident? Incompetence that leads to my wrongful conviction and death is probably just as likely as the incompetence that would lead to my death when I'm supposed to be protected. It's a hell of a lot less likely than the death of those whom I'm not-exactly being protected from, such as the countless victims of "collateral damage".