What I'm saying, is that there is no common relation.. Well, I'm not sure how to say it.
Everybody dressed the same (even as I type that, I feel that it's insane) then the treatment is the same. How sad that is, though.
The uniform, the badge, the authority, seems to take precedence over common sense in this case. The rogue cop who doing something as suggested in the OP, would seem to be appropriately stopped by SYG.
But in all cases, an LEO is carrying a gun. So that makes it still unequal in that the citizen is always considered less reliable than the LEO. The citizen that draws on a policeman, is going to be charged with attempted murder, or whatever.
And if the LEO sees the gun there, it can be an excuse for killing the citizen, legally. This is a nightmare scenario. In the case of the Occupy protester, his protection is being non-violent. So he should not be carrying a weapon.
There was an interesting protest in AZ where some burly open carrying men came to stand between peaceful protesters (who were a bit freaked by them in the videos) and the police. They explained by saying. 'Our second amendment rights protect our first amendment right, and theirs, too.'
It was a remarkable protest, right meets left. There was no violence, and it was not a matter of CCW. AZ had open carry, that in some states would be termed brandishing a weapon to intimidate, or something.
I'm having trouble though, answering the OP. All things being equal, a person could take all those actions he listed, but what we have to figure out, is how to justify things not being equal. Because they aren't. It's not that simple. Any help in reasoning this out would be appreciated but I'm about to drift off to sleep!
= new reply since forum marked as read
