Shooting critics’ ignorance boggles the mind and will result in anarchy

In one of the latest officer-involved shootings rioters used as an excuse to wreak havoc on their own neighborhoods, an officer shot a subject who was in possession of a handgun.

The coverage in the news media has been laughable. “Just because he was in possession of a gun doesn’t mean the officers had the right to confront him,” “he wasn’t even the subject they were looking for initially,” etc.

But, by far, the dumbest criticism is: “He wasn’t pointing the gun at the officer in a threatening manner.” Let me get this straight, you are holding a gun, not obeying the officer’s command to drop it, and the officer is supposed to wait until you point it at him before he fires? Clearly, the critics of officers in these situations have no clue whatsoever how quickly an officer can end up dead if he waits for the gun to be pointing at him. No, if you are stupid enough to display a gun in the presence of officers (whether you are in legal possession of the gun or not), and the officer displays the courtesy of warning you first (which can also get the officer killed in a hurry), and you end up getting yourself killed when you fail to comply, you have no one to blame but yourself.

The absolute ignorance of the critics is mind-boggling. It won’t be long before they get what they want: total anarchy.

This story was originally published October 20, 2016 at 8:11 PM with the headline "Shooting critics’ ignorance boggles the mind and will result in anarchy."