Being a police officer is already one of the toughest jobs on the planet, but ever since the shooting death of Michael Brown in Ferguson and the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement, it’s become an occupation that is hazardous to your health.
Liberals on the left have seized on these tragedies as a means of further entrenching themselves as heroes of minority groups, ensuring that these folks continue to vote Democrat and help keep them in power.
They openly push a false narrative that all police are racist in an attempt to further divide people and make themselves out to be the good guy, stirring up hatred and anger among regular people, often causing violent riots and even murders.
Just look at how many police officers have been shot and killed in the line of duty over the last several years. It’s appalling.
Well, it seems a federal appeals court in Seattle has launched an assault against law enforcement, ruling that police can only use what they called “proportional” force, meaning force that is equal to that which they are facing. The problem, as always, is what is proportional and who makes that determination?
via The Daily Caller:
A federal appeals court in Seattle ruled Tuesday that police can only use force “proportional” to the threat they face, seriously damaging the Seattle Police Department’s ability to use firearms.
The ruling from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the use of force reforms put in place by federal mandates earlier this year that required police to use only “objectively reasonable force, proportional to the threat or urgency of the situation,” the Associated Press reports. The unanimous ruling strikes down a lawsuit filed by a group of more than 120 Seattle officers in May who claimed that the strict reforms infringe on an officer’s right to self defense and the Second Amendment.
“The City of Seattle has a significant interest in regulating the use of department-issued firearms by its police officers,” Judge William Hayes wrote, adding that the policy “did not impose a substantial burden on plaintiffs’ right to use a firearm.”
Seattle police argued the new policies would cause officers to second guess themselves before using firearms in life-threatening situations, The Seattle Times reported. This “hesitation and paralysis” prevented police from exercising their right to self defense, they claimed.
Police further said that this hesitance or fear of using their firearms would result in a “dramatic decrease in proactive police work to investigate and stop crime.”
Look, no one is against responsible restrictions on law enforcement officers to make sure they do their jobs correctly and the rights of American citizens are protected and upheld, but going so far as to more or less restrict them from using tools designed to ensure their safety is a horrible idea.
You are basically inviting criminals to assault or kill our men and women in uniform, all in the name of political expediency. It’s dangerous and will no doubt result in unnecessary deaths.
These people go out on the streets each and every day to make sure criminals who want to destroy our lives or steal our property are kept in check, knowing they may not come home that evening to kiss their kids good night.
The least we can do is afford them the necessary tools to do their job and stay safe, since they are sacrificing much to make sure we can enjoy our lives on a daily basis.