Initial reports are that six police officers have been shot in a deliberate ambush. Three are reported to be dead. One of the ambushers is reportedly dead too, with two more being sought by the authorities.
I can’t defend all police shootings of suspects. Some of them are clearly wrong – indeed, some have led to criminal convictions of cops in court, and others are likely to do so – but the majority have been proven to be within the boundaries of the law. Unfortunately, radical elements are now portraying all of them as wrong, before the courts have had an opportunity to pronounce on each case. They’ve made themselves judge, jury and executioner, so to speak. That can’t have anything but a bad ending.
What this will inevitably lead to is more shootings on both sides. Police will be understandably suspicious and on edge when they approach suspects. Any movement at all, no matter how innocent its intent, may be interpreted as a prelude to violence, and will therefore be met with pre-emptive violence to stop it in its tracks. In the same way, some citizens will interpret any police interaction as a prelude to a violation of their rights, which may lead them to react more violently than would otherwise be the case. Instant, instinctive, reflexive reaction will replace common sense. There will be more shootings on both sides, and the cycle of violence will get worse and worse.
Ordinary citizens like you and I are now much more likely to respond violently to future incidents. When we know that groups like Black Lives Matter are actively targeting police, and posting approving comments on social media whenever the latter are attacked and murdered, we’re going to be a whole lot less trusting of them. For example, in the past, BLM activists have disrupted restaurant patrons. Guess what’s likely to happen if they do that again? Where I live, they’re likely to be met with gunfire, because patrons won’t trust them to get within arms’ length. I can’t blame them. I’ll certainly have that attitude myself, particularly since I’m permanently partially disabled and can’t fight off an attack physically as I once would have done. Now, given disparity of force issues and the current social climate, my response to threatened (or even implied) violence is likely to be a whole lot more immediate, and a whole lot less tolerant.
Black Lives Matter might care to think about that. If this blows up into racial conflict, the numbers are all against them. They can’t possibly win – they can only take as many as possible with them when they go down. From that sort of conflict, there will be no winners at all. I know this. I learned it the hard way in another country. Unfortunately, few (if any) BLM activists have any experience of just how bad things can (and probably will) get. I fear they’re about to find out.
Peter
I'm trying to put myself into the body of someone like LTC Allen West and imagine what he and others of his political leanings are thinking.
At some point, LEADERSHIP must step up.
While Moses was pleading with Pharaoh to let his people go, God was "hardening Pharaoh's heart".
I wonder… some of this behavior seems SO irrational…
Is that what's happening here?
In a war, which is what they seem to want, there are indeed winners and losers. The winners are still alive at the end, and the losers aren't. Sometimes, it's just that brutally simple. But my, oh my, if this kicks off here in a big way it will make Bosnia look like a minor spat.
I really don't think they know what they're getting into with all of this. I do believe that Obama and co. approve, because they think that chaos favors their plans for domination. His hatred of whites and the police is just icing on the cake for him. So sad.
Greybeard, good question. The anonymous Psalmist of Ps 95 states, "Today if you hear His voice do not harden your hearts as you did at Meribah…" This is repeated twice in Hebrews. Does God still harden hearts? Does He need/want to when we do a good job of it ourselves? (Our pastor was preaching from Hebrews and I get bored receiving info at the rate of voice so I search relevant scriptures in my Bible during his sermon).
Anyway, I just wanted to thank Peter for sharing his experience and advise. I switched 2 months ago from carrying a small Keltech 9mm which I shot well at 21 ft to a Glock MD 22 that I have confidence in at much further range such as across our sanctuary(seats 120). We avoid crowds but worship of God with family will go on no matter what may come. Peter, again thanks. I sit by the main door and a friend guards the side entrance. I have a 'blow out kit'. My wife and I can both use it. Interestingly I find it easier to keep my worship Christ centered with these precautions.
No, they truly don't understand what will happen if/when that tipping point is reached. Words will be too little, too late. All the posturing in the world isn't proof against an accurate shooter with their carry weapon, or the AR in the truck who has had enough and is bent on protecting themselves and their families.
They'll be surprised when they "pop a cap on their Glock fo-tay" and are met with aimed fire from a scoped deer rifle.
Pity.
This is the absolute worst I have seen our nation at. Far worse than the 60's and that was a hot mess.
Martial Law and no election?
Trailbee's comment is my fear too, especially if there's violence in Cleveland next week.
RE: Trailbee's comment:
U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 4:
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of choosing Senators.
So, the several states are responsible for holding elections for national offices, although I suppose for some values of martial law the feds could decide to disregard the results, except that provision of martial law would have to have agreement from Congress (both houses, I assume). Executive action to suspend/disregard election results just might be sufficient grounds for citizens of the several states to demonstrate their dissatisfaction with that position.
As for BLM creating irrevocable conflict, given that George Soros et al appear to be the major funding source for the activity, that could very well be the objective.
I doubt anyone associated with BLM is fully cognizant of the deep resentment 50 years of most favored treatment has engendered among whites, or, perhaps, they consider it a feature rather than a bug. I'm inclined to side with NFO – should sufficient provocation exist to lead to direct action being initiated it will almost certainly be prosecuted to conclusion, one that the provacateurs will fail to enjoy.
One hopes direction can be changed, but it looks more and more like the front wheels of the bus are nearly off the cliff edge already.
OK, show of hands, how many think this is being driven by folks who want Martial Law, and will declared Martial Law result in suspended elections? We are an AWFULLY BIG COUNTRY for military control, even if every single troop were pulled back from overseas…. Or would we see the "ObamaCorps" get Federalized?
Using all that Ammo Homeland bought? ��
John,
if you combine all the badge toters in all the various .gov depts (Education, Housing, EPA, etc…) it supposedly exceeds the Marine Corps numbers. THAT is what Obama had in mind when he mentioned some years ago that he needed a federal police force. I'm betting that everything is already set up to combine them into one force, minus some quick work with his "pen and phone".
I don't see any grand conspiracies in any of this. Pushing and encouragement, yes, but no puppet masters. But this is predictable nonetheless.
Antibubba
Aye, I'd say that too. Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity.