Shooting the cops in this case is dangerous—they may send a SWAT team to kill you—and in many places it's illegal. But it is nevertheless morally permissible, indeed heroic and admirable.
I don't disagree with the author, but the state of Oklahoma limits whom I am allowed to defend with force. If the Hubbard case had happened here, it would have been a serious felony for me to have defended him.
Well, maybe I didn't disagree too early. I have to admit I only quickly scanned the article. Some of the author's arguments I'll have to think about more. For example:
"It's true that we sometimes ask soldiers, police, bureaucrats, and others to enforce unjust laws. We the People often deserve the blame for creating bad laws. But police can—and should—say no. Better yet, they should lie and say yes but then choose not to enforce the bad laws."
Yes, but there's a lot of danger there. It's a debate I've heard before, but not one I've thought through and decided for myself.
It's an interesting read. Thanks for posting it.
ReplyDeleteI don't disagree with the author, but the state of Oklahoma limits whom I am allowed to defend with force. If the Hubbard case had happened here, it would have been a serious felony for me to have defended him.
Well, maybe I didn't disagree too early. I have to admit I only quickly scanned the article. Some of the author's arguments I'll have to think about more. For example:
ReplyDelete"It's true that we sometimes ask soldiers, police, bureaucrats, and others to enforce unjust laws. We the People often deserve the blame for creating bad laws. But police can—and should—say no. Better yet, they should lie and say yes but then choose not to enforce the bad laws."
Yes, but there's a lot of danger there. It's a debate I've heard before, but not one I've thought through and decided for myself.