First we'll start with the initial unsubstantiated story: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/10/03/police-involved-in-capitol-shooting-unpaid-due-to-partial-shutdown/?intcmp=HPBucket
As I am sitting here at work at on a 12 hours shift knowing that I will only be sitting here watching tv due to weather, now a civilian under contract with the army, wondering if I am going to get paid in two weeks, I've been pondering a few things in regard to this country. A country that I personally believe to have been God blessed and God inspired.
As I am sure you all remember the uproar when what's-his-bucket, a wannabe cop was acquitted of killing the wannabe thug. From my point of view, he was an unpaid member of society who used deadly force in protecting his neighborhood. The question that a jury answered was that he was justified.
Now in relation to that story, we have a story of unpaid capitol police (degraded to neighborhood watch) killing a woman who was driving her car in a manner which could be construed as "irresponsible". On one hand, I can see the gallantry and self sacrifice made by these men, to continue to work in defense of their nation, even though they are not getting paid for it. But on the other hand, I have to ask...what is the difference between them and the Florida neighborhood watch guy.....except that they were pretty sure that if they stayed out of the way of the moving vehicle, they were not in mortal danger in any way. In this case, they might have been certifiable police officers...but they were not being paid, which means that they were not on duty. Whether or not they were in uniform is irrelevant. They took it upon themselves to act in an official capacity. They were volunteers, thus lethal force is not authorized unless there is actual life threatening danger to themselves or others. (even when on duty that is the case) But the application of lethal force needs a grand jury when applied by "civilians (volunteers)"....and as we saw in the Florida case, the persons involved should be incarcerated until said grand jury makes that decision, or they post bail.
I noticed in the story that "shots were fired" but it never says that the woman fired shots. It is obvious that shots were fired...by the neighborhood watch patrol!
I think the police should be commended for working without pay. But watching a video of the incident, I am trying to figure out what the rational was for shooting the woman? The barriers at both the White House and Capitol will stop a Mac truck, let alone a small sedan. More importantly, doesn't D.C. have laws against people having guns, let alone carrying them in the open? Will the Justice Department show us another double standard?
I raise those questions because in our current society there are huge limits placed on people, because of the Department of Labor and their union handlers. Every police union, has in its contracts, that a police officer must be paid if he is to be considered "on duty." This raises the question of whether or not these police officers were legal to be carrying pistols in the District of Columbia....which unlawfully forbids American Citizens from doing so. As well as were they on duty or not? It looks like there are multiple laws being broken. Who will be accountable for that?