Quote:
Originally Posted by The Batlord
But, the point is that they do have the right to use violence as a last resort. It's where all their authority rests on. When the police pull you over for a traffic violation, there is an understanding that if you don't stop they have the power to physically find a way to stop your car, and if you continue to resist, they can shoot you (or physically restrain you, which won't be done with a pillow fight). If they give you a ticket, you then have to show up in court. If you don't show up to court, they put out a warrant for you, and will then arrest you. If you resist, they can and will use violence to subdue you. In any conceivable situation, no matter how unlikely, ultimately they have the power of violence over you. If you a police officer steps on your foot, you can tell him to **** off, but you can't push him like you might be able to do to someone else, because you are then assaulting a police officer, and then you will be arrested, blah, blah, blah.
|
Yes but just because you CAN use violence doesn't mean you HAVE to, or are going to. So calling the police is not an act of violence. At worst, it's allowing for the possibility that violence will be perpetrated. But then again, that's up to the one the police are calling on. No cop in his or her right mind is going to kick someone's door in and shove a gun in the face of anyone who acts reasonably and doesn't give them reason to. On the other hand, if you were to alert the police that some loon was shooting up an apartment or shopping mall, would you not then expect, even welcome, the use of violence in subduing said loon?