I don't quite understand what you're saying here.
I pointing out the irony, or disconnect in some arguments I've seen made here.
When one argues that cops are being shot because of government oppression, that someone is implicitly admitting that police officers represent the government. They are being shot--in such cases--not because the assailant is personally upset at them, but precisely because of what they represent: they are the embodiment or government/social authority and power.
For anyone who so argues to then turn around and claim that a life is a life and a cop's life is no different than any other life is to ignore that the cop represents government/social authority and power. It is a logical disconnect.
Not necessarily. I can imagine quite a number of reasons for such an attack.
I accounted for this. It is entirely possible for a cop (or a governor or any other government official) to be the victim of a crime for reasons entirely unrelated to his office or position. But when a government official is targeted because he is a government official, the violation of rights extends beyond the individual and attacks the state/government/society as a whole.
Federalism is another idea that seems quite nice, but can produce centralization of power concentrated within a "ruling class."
I'm open to hearing about alternatives. I prefer a central government strong in certain, limited functions (national defense, maintaining an honest money supply, guaranteeing certain basic rights) and proscribed from any action at all in other areas (local zoning, local speed limits, etc).
All powers not delegated to the central government, nor explicitly prohibited to the States, should be exercised by the States. Socialized health care, rent control, zoning to protect historic districts? I find all offensive, but I don't think any are a federal concern. I'll fight them in my State but not care a whit if some other State wants to implement them. Ditto for which math or sex ed curriculum get used. Within limits of not infringing basic rights with racial segregation, I don't care much how NY or Cali run their schools so long as my State can run our schools as our citizens/residents see fit. I'm no longer and not yet a fan drug legalization. I don't want to see it in my State. But I'm supportive of other States' proper power to legalize pot. I'll watch their experience and see if my view changes. Ditto for gambling, prostitution, and a host of other social matters.
I think one of our challenges as a nation is that every issue has become a federal matter which forces a one-size-fits-all on a very large, very diverse nation. By total area, we are the 3rd largest nation in the world among over 240 nations listed. We are also the 3rd largest by population behind China and India. We are widely diverse in terms of race/ethnicity (watch the Olympic teams of various nations entering the stadiums during opening ceremonies as one simple testament of this), religious views, and overall culture. New England has a very different culture than the Deep South which are different than the Midwest farmlands which differ from the Intermountain West which differ from the mid-atlantic and left-coast regions. We'd be far better off with more local diversity of laws and culture and a lot less control from the federal levels.
Charles
