I suppose there is only one thing worse that a police state, and that would be a no-police state. Lawfulness or lawlessness? If we had no other options, I'd chose the former.
If you're like me, you've heard of a growing police state—especially in America (my main source for news). Either that, or we're being fed a pile of [#@!%&] from the press. I would think the truth is somewhere in the middle, namely, there has been an extra dose of unnecessary intrusion and excessive force in recent months, but it may not be as bad as it sounds. I don't know for sure, but, then, neither do you.
So let's discuss here what is rarely being discussed elsewhere, unless you wisely get your news from Glenn Beck or Ezra Levant. In other words, I'm not really commenting on the apparent growing police state, as much as I am on the over-the-top protests and their coverage.
While none of us were at the recent events (in Ferguson and NYC, for example), the professional protesters and liberal media were. That tells me right there that some reporting was skewered, biased, and dangerous.
There appears to be a groundswell movement to attack, malign, and even kill cops these days. I'm choosing my generalization carefully, so you'll need to read between the lines on this one. I see too many people with too much time and too few brains out there, ready and eager for a fight in the name of justice.
"The name of justice" would be an interesting way to put it. I suggest that it's a call for justice alright, but in name only. To demand justice through insurrection is an oxymoron. In my opinion, it's nothing more than a front for lawlessness and anarchy. These justice-demanders appear to hide behind the colour, age, gender, and victimization complex. That strikes me as hypocritical, inconsistent, and frightening.
There are some issues I can't quite grasp: Why did we watch the extensive coverage of the anarchists in Ferguson, night after night, while there was limited coverage of the assassination of two innocent cops in New York City? (Add the death of a Florida cop while you're at it.)
In fact, there wasn't much of any protest, so far as I could tell.
And race seems to be the underlying issue here, or at least that's what we're told. Again, scant coverage when the roles are reversed. That's where the hypocrisy and inconsistency comes in.
Here's what's reported: a black victim killed by a white villain. Here's what not reported: a white victim killed by a black villain. Or the bigger issue, namely, black young men killing other black young men.
On the other hand, do we ever read anything about the significant acts of kindness cops have done and are doing all over the States on a daily basis? Where's the coverage of the overwhelming random acts of kindness provided by white cops to black citizens? Nary a word.
Are cops perfect? Are you kidding me? They're humans just like the rest of us. They are just as prone to lose it like anyone else—be it a rancher, trucker, or contractor. But you never read of those types being vilified the way cops are.
I even read of an accident in Abbotsford, BC, the other day, where an "of-duty cop" struck a pedestrian. I have never read of a off-duty doctor or teacher being identified the same way, so why a cop? Why the slanted reporting?
No, the spirit of lawlessness is a far more scary matter than the spirit of a police state.
When it's open season on cops, and race is in the mix, we're in serious trouble. When the law fails us, lowbrows, deadbeats, and professional anarchists are a deadly alternative.
You don't like cops? Fine: Next time you're in trouble, call a professional protester. They've got the time and the energy. Just make sure you fit the requirements for their selective justice.
No comments:
Post a Comment