Unless you’ve been bothered daily/nightly by noise, dogs, idiot Wal Martians, Etc, you would not understand the misery noise brings into your life.

Cops do stand up for other’s rights, including when that means escorting a white supremacist rally through an ethnically diverse neighborhood. It also means protecting people and property from the actions of a mob.

But your most intesting response was:

“However, as in the case of your sticks and poles (a reasonable person might ask why someone brings such objects to a peaceful act of civil disobedience?), that discretion can lean towards forceful action.”

A reasonable person might ask, but the answer is immaterial. Sticks and poles? What if the protesters brought pitchforks and torches? How about AK-47s and Glock 22s? Would you confiscate someone’s firearms from a protest even if the guns weren’t being used in a threatening manner? If the governor declared a state of emergency, and ordered the police to seize all privately held firearms due to threat of civil uprising, would you do it?

No, the nuremberg point is NOT hyperbole or a cliche, except for those it applies to. Laws aren’t supposed to be enforced on a whim. Our own law agencies aren’t supposed to break the law in order to stop other crime, no matter the good intentions behind it. Rules aren’t supposed to be ignored because they are inconvenient. And you speak of “protect and serve” how are you protecting and serving by ignoring constitutional rights simply because someone told you to?

I agree that law enforcement jobs that are political appointments need to change. Politicians shouldn’t have control over the people charged with enforcing the laws they had created. Nor should agencies circumvent laws for political gain. Nor should politicians circumvent their own laws for political reasons. As a law enforcement officer, you are looked at by the public to stand up for an individual’s rights, regardless of whether you agree with those rights or not.

As a retired military veteran, I took my oath seriously. That’s why it’s alarming to me to see others treat it with such a cavalier attitude.

But thanks for your comment.

It would be a waste of time to attempt to talk you out of your mindset, but allow a brief explanation on the use of discretion in law enforcement. Police discretion is recognized by statute and in policy. Its intent is to allow trained police officers to use their common sense and good judgment into a situation which might be made worse by a strict interpretation of the law.

Sometimes, as in the federal example cited in my column, that discretion can have political origins. The reason is that most federal agencies are run by political appointees who, within the scope of the law, may make judgment calls that are based in politics, sometimes frustratingly so. However, in the case of immigration I do understand that simply putting illegal aliens into detention may have unpleasant and far reaching consequences. My biggest gripe is that our country has failed to find a clear solution, to write a clear policy and to consistently enforce it.

However, as in the case of your sticks and poles (a reasonable person might ask why someone brings such objects to a peaceful act of civil disobedience?), that discretion can lean towards forceful action.

Protect and serve, Mr. Gandalf. Protect and serve.

If Obama wins a second term there is sure to be a comprehensive amnesty, with American taxpayers the losers, having even a larger hunk taken from the payroll check. And to be honest I am not even confident of the Republicans agenda, as that tends to flip-flop? But what I am sure about is the plan of the TEA PARTY if they can eject many Democrats and Republican incumbents and replace them? Its already happening and by replacing incumbents in the Republican Party can politically persist that the “LEGAL WORKFORCE ACT (E-VERIFY) and the BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP LAW” finds passage and enacted to restrain more illegal alien invaders. They bring their unborn babies here, to live as parasites of the U.S. taxpayer. The children of illegal aliens had no say in coming to America, but by the enactment of the BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP BILL, this incredulous expensive issue for taxpayers is solved.

Not one to be a conspiracy theorist, but something seems to be irregular with Obama’s zealots concealing his birth background, military service papers and even his university history. If you are open to reserving your judgment, go to the TEA PARTY.ORG and you can make a decision on this set of events. If you have a closed mind and vote for President Obama, you better be ready in forty five days to place upon all taxpayers the largest tax hike in years. Of course this will pay for all the usual issues as defense of this country, but other tax funds will be going to pay for a new Obama amnesty, free hospitalization to deliver illegal alien babies, their schooling, low income housing, school breakfast and lunch, welfare payments for the child that goes towards the parents illegal employment cash and many things that are denied lawful citizens and green card holders, plus we shouldn’t forget the “Freeloaders.” Not the sick infirm, but those who are cheating the system, allowing others to pay for the cigarettes, drugs and alcohol. Learn more about the corruption and rot in Washington at The People’s legal team at Judicial Watch.org.

Our country is going to the dogs with Marxist “Political Correctness” Cops cannot do their duty, without being threatened by the subversives of a Justice Department run by Eric Holder and his czars. The Obama administration has trodden the U.S. Constitution into the slime of their agenda for an outlaw government.

Doesn’t law enforcement take an oath to uphold the constitution of the united states, as well as the laws they are charged to enforce? I’m sure you’re familiar with that oath personally. It also mentions something about “lawful orders of those appointed over us”, which is the sticking point. The law should trump any order. Officers should ignore orders that conflict with the law, and/or the constitution. Yet, LEO constantly violates personal rights, ignore laws, and disregard the constitution, mostly on orders from their superiors.

Recent example, the “riots” in seattle a few months ago. Law Enforcement, on orders from the mayor, illegally confiscated “weapons” (sticks, poles, etc), violating both local laws as well as the bill of rights in both our state as well as the US constitution. Why didn’t LEOs question that order, or even better, refuse to enforce it?

In the same vein, why is illegal immigration and deportation even a question? They broke the law. Enforce it. They (federal agents as well as local police) should do their duty, not kowtow to political pressure or illegal orders.

This one subject is what most alarms me. The argument of “I was just following orders” didn’t work too well in Nuremberg either.