From: viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson)
Subject: Re: No charges filed in SWAT killing
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 02:47:26 GMT

In <bd!nwx#@dixie.com> jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond) writes:

>viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson) writes:

>Whatever happened to the concept that the police are supposed to lay their
>lives on the line if necessary to protect innocent life?  The gestapo in
>blue storming a house on the basis of an anonymous tip is NOT the same
>as a private citizen protecting his property from mauraders.  

	I have never felt that the police should give up their lives so
that I might remain alive.  I regard them as people just as I, and that
they should have every right to protect their own lives as I do.  I do
agree with the anonymous tip idea, but my taxes don't pay for police to
die in my behalf, they merely pay for police to apprehend suspects.

>This is not a war.  Even if Stalin had been in that house, our
>law  nominally regards him as innocent.  That means he as as
>much right to expect not to be murdered by the pigs as does you
>or I.  

	I agree.

>There is NO JUSTIFICATION EVER for a cop to kill an 
>innocent.  Period.  When it happens, the cop should be charged
>with first  degree murder and executed.   Those cops who cannot take
>the risk of those consequences should get a real job.

	I diagree.  I need not actually shoot you before you are
quite justified in shooting me.  Let's say I pulled a gun and
aimed it at you, citizen-to-citizen.  Will you shoot me before I
shoot you, or will to wait until I shoot before defending yourself?
As for the above, I note that at least a trial with a jury should
be onvolved before an execution.  Intent and probability is the
idea here, and one I believe I have made myself clear on.  How
can I expect the police to operate any differently?

>There is simply NO REASON, PERIOD, for the cops ever to storm
>the house in the middle of the night except to rescue innocents.
>If the cops need to capture a person in a house, they can do it
>the old fashioned way by staking out the house and capturing the
>perp coming or going.  

	I agree with the last, but I disagree with the first sentence
as various scenario's can be made to justify the action.  The
rescue of innocents is one.  The apprehension of, let's say, a cop-
killer, might require different tactics.  Again, it is my previous
actions that should dictate response measures.

>>	As for the police, most have my respect, and SWAT teams have my
>>respect, but like any group there are individuals I don't respect.  Tony
>>may be one of them, or he may be innocent of intentional wrongdoing.  I
>>prefer to let those who are fully informed decide.

>You know, you really ought to find someone who lived in Germany in the 
>late 30s and see how much your attitude parallels that of "good German
>citizens" during the rise of Nazism.

	For your information, I've become good friends with Germans of
that era.  You might take political and individual differences into
account before attempting to flame with this bit of bait.  I sense
a minor flamewar is about to happen.

>  The jews were gradually built up 
>to be the same boogeyman enemy of the state and all the normal people
>as are the evil, assault drug merchants of death today.  Extraordinary,
>supralegal means of ridding the country of the menance was justified 
>back then using the same logic being used today to justify state-sponsored
>murder.  We have not yet seen the modern day Krystalnaught (sp) but it
>is coming.  

	And I disagree with it, just as I disagree that the average
Soviet is my enemy.  Several have met me, talked to me, and I have
come to the conclusion they they are people just as I am.  It is
only my government that wishes to make them devils.

>Let me ask you this, Dan.  Today government-sponsored terrorism is aimed 
>at the evil, mostly foreign drug lords and their lackeys.  That may be
>fine with you since you obviously buy off on the party line that drugs 
>are inherently evil and thus must be destroyed.

	Beware of stereotypes, for they may prove you wrong in the
case of an individual.


>  But what are you going to
>do tomorrow or the next day when the new target of the State is something
>you are involved in?  Suppose tomorrow it is guns or copying machines or 
>fax machines or radios or whatever the government determines is the next
>Enemy of Society?  Are you willing to live in fear of your life against
>the threat of armed goon squads dressed in black storming your house
>and machine-gunning you or your family?  It is only a small stretch of
>twisted logic to go from anthromorphizing chemicals to doing the same
>thing to other objects in your surroundings.  

	I live with this each day, and I am not comfortable with it.
However, I draw a distinction between the officer in the trenches storming
my house the the Chief sitting behind his desk and passing along the
orders to the grunts.

>Fighting a military war
>of terrorism on drugs today makes just about as much sense as fighting
>the military war of terrorism against unclean races did in the 40s in
>Germany.

	While I agree in principle, you might note that I never said I
condined such practices, and that I was merely unwilling to point
the blame directly on the officer and preferred a board of inquiry
and a jury to make the final decision.

>Think about this a bit and if you still think Good Ole Tony is a
>reasonable person who just made a little mistake, you are a blithering
>idiot.  

	 He may have been.  Have to enough information to make the
final decision?  If you have, would you mind posting it here?  I]
take wha tI read with a grain of salt, so to speak, and just as I
do not rely on NBC to provide me with all the information I also do
not rely on you to provide me with all the information.

	Sorry, but Tony is still a human being and deserves the same
rights and benefits I hold for myself.  If you don't like this, just
turn the tables and see how you like it as a gun owner.  I don't,
and I prefer to play fair in this instance.

<Dan Sorenson, DoD #1066 |"There'll be angels on Ariels in leather>
<z1dan@exnet.iastate.edu | and chrome, Ridin' down from heaven    >
<viking@iastate.edu      | just to carry me home." -- R. Thompson >
< ISU thinks I need more education, which they provide for a fee. >
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns