Our Fearless Protectors

So McLatchy has a story about the alleged use of a Taser on a man in California who is wheelchair bound on account of having both his legs amputated. The story itself is pretty damning but I am just using it segue into a post about the ongoing degeneration of the moral authority of the police and armed forces when it comes to balancing their safety versus ours (civilians).

Cops and soldiers have a right and a responsibility to use reasonable means to ensure their own safety (after all if they keep getting themselves killed who will keep the bad guys at bay?). Their right to personal safety however ends or at least becomes reduced when my right as an innocent civilian to continue breathing comes into play.

When 4(!) fully trained, presumably fit, police officers Taser a guy wielding a stapler at least twice, maybe 4 times even though the guy hasn't harmed or threatened anyone they have crossed the line.

When NATO forces call in an air strike to destroy a couple of stolen fuel trucks and in the process kill scores of civilians they have crossed the line.

There are countless other examples but these two seem to demonstrate an attitude that the worst case scenario is risk of  injury or death to the security services people. We (the citizenry) grant extraordinary powers to the security services. They, for their part, must (or at least should) accept that with extraordinary powers comes extraordinary risks.

Missile Defence

According to the NYT;

President Obama announced on Thursday that he would scrap former President George W. Bush’s planned missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic and instead deploy a reconfigured system aimed more at intercepting shorter-range Iranian missiles.

I confess I've been steadily losing confidence that the Obama administration would mark the beginning of a return to sanity in the United States but I suppose even baby steps are steps. Still, however, two giant elephants continue to roam the room at will;

“President Bush was right that Iran’s ballistic missile program poses a significant threat,” Mr. Obama told reporters

No, Iran's ballistic missile program is the perfectly logical response to threats posed to Iran, specifically by the United States and Israel. It's not like they are subtle or anything, hardly a week goes by without an official spokesperson issuing threats that the US or Israel or both are prepared and willing to attack Iran pre-emptively. Iran of course also issues threats but no one sane takes them very seriously. Sure, the Iranian military could attempt something and the almost certain result would be UAD (Unilateral Assured Destruction).


Now before anyone thinks I am a supporter of the (mostly) bat-shit crazy Iranian regime let's make a clear distinction between the government and the nation of Iran.  The government of Iran is obliged to provide for the defence of the nation of Iran. We can wish that Iran had a visit from the liberal democracy fairy and becomes the Switzerland of the middle east tomorrow but I wouldn't count on it. So where does this leave us? Because we despise the government of Iran they are not even entitled to attempt to defend the nation of Iran from a clear and present danger posed by 2 countries who have in the last 5 years or so actually carried out threats to invade sovereign nations?


Elephant the second;

This new approach will provide capabilities sooner, build on proven systems and offer greater defenses against the threat of missile attack than the 2007 European missile defense program.

Again no, the only thing missile defence is "capable" of and "proven" to do is to move massive amounts of money from taxpayers to defence contractors.