Posts
Comments
When IS it justifiable to initiate force? (Answer or don't, but a simple "dislike" is the most slovenly thing a mind can do.)
Typical. Ask a pointed question, and don't get answers but knee-jerk negativity. Does anyone here READ any of the blog posts on this site, which tend to be about such perceptive bias? Is initiating force something that's always wrong, or is it OK when wearing blue and done as an agent of a third party? What if the 9-11 hijackers had been wearing blue? What if they had been Saudi cops? Would they be heroes? If not, why not? Is your title/livelihood the important deciding factor in whether you are doing good or evil, or is it something based on WHAT you DO regardless of who you are? If you can't think of a smart rebuttal, then thumbsdowning just makes you look deliberately ignorant. On the other hand, it may be good practice for the IQ test many police departments require: score too high and they'll discard your application!
Quote: "If someone has to die, it may as well be the initiator of force, to discourage future violence and thereby minimize the total sum of death. "If the Enemy has an average disposition, and is acting from beliefs about their situation that would make violence a typically human response, then that doesn't mean their beliefs are factually accurate. It doesn't mean they're justified. It means you'll have to shoot down someone who is the hero of their own story, and in their novel the protagonist will die on page 80. That is a tragedy, but it is better than the alternative tragedy. It is the choice that every police officer makes, every day, to keep our neat little worlds from dissolving into chaos."
On the one hand, you believe that the initiator of force is the one who deserves to die. On the other hand, you seem to have a love affair with police officers. Which is it? Are initiators of force heroes when they wear blue clothing? Or do they deserve to die too, when they initiate force? (which is about 95% of their job lately)