Commentators are confusing interference with police in the line of duty with peaceful protest
Paul Craig Roberts
Ron Unz of the Unz Review, John Whitehead of the Rutherford Institute and others have made the point that once we accept police violence because we disapprove of those experiencing it we have let the genie out of the bottle. The point has also been made that conservatives betray their Second Amendment position when they argue that participating in a protest when armed is legitimate grounds for being shot by police.
I have no quarrel with these points. My point is different. The January 6 protest was a protest, while the so-called protest in Minneapolis is in fact organized resistance to police carrying out their duties. Jan 6 was a rally in support of an honest presidential vote count. What is underway in Minneapolis is an effort to prevent police from caring out lawful activities. These are quite different things.
The two people in Minneapolis shot by ICE federal agents were either resisting arrest or behaving aggressively. Contrast this with Ashli Babbitt, a 35-year-old Air Force veteran. She was fatally shot by U.S. Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd on January 6, 2021. Byrd, a black officer who defended his actions as lawful and necessary to protect members of Congress, was cleared of wrongdoing by the US Department of Justice. No evidence was presented that Babbitt was interfering with or obstructing Byrd in his duty or that she was a threat to members of Congress.
Clearly, we have a double standard here. Ashley Babbitt was resisting no arrest and was committing no violence. She didn’t even know that Officer Byrd was behind her. He issued no order. He simply shot her dead.
Yet the left-wing US Department of Justice could find no wrong in Officer Byrd’s action. But the same left-wing demands that ICE officers be held accountable for using violence against people interfering with police duties.
I am surprised that such intelligent people as Unz and Whitehead are content to let the leftwing and the whore media get away with equating interference with police in their line of duty with a peaceful protest. We must stay on guard against the leftwing’s misuse of words.
Perhaps Unz, Whitehead, Democrats and the whore media should acquaint themselves with the law:
“It is a crime to interfere with, obstruct, or resist a police officer in the line of duty, usually classified as a misdemeanor or felony depending on the severity. Such actions, including verbal harassment, failing to obey commands, or physical resistance, are illegal and can lead to immediate arrest.
“Key Aspects of Interfering with Police:
“Definition: This involves hindering, opposing, or delaying law enforcement officers, firefighters, or other authorized personnel in their official duties.
“Types of Interference:
“Resisting with violence: A felony offense involving physical force against an officer.
“Resisting without violence: A misdemeanor that includes running away, refusing to obey lawful commands, or interfering with an arrest.
“Distance restrictions: Laws, such as the Florida “HALO” law, allow arrests if individuals refuse to stay a certain distance (e.g., 25 feet) away from an officer after being told to move.
“Consequences: Penalties range from fines to jail time, with higher charges if the interference causes physical injury or occurs during a serious felony investigation.
“While filming police from a safe distance is generally legal, it becomes a crime if it actively interferes with their duties. “