False Pacifists
All Talk and No Action
By Daniel Muniz

When it comes to violent crime or the immediate threat of it, most Americans typically fall into the “law and order” category of citizenry in which they expect law enforcement to use whatever means necessary to bring violence to a swift and definitive end, especially when their loved ones are involved. And that is not an unrealistic expectation particularly when someone is either being physically harmed or is in grave danger. The public is simply counting on the police to do their duty to protect the public.

And for most people, if such action requires that the police use lethal force that may very well seriously injure or even end the life of a vicious hoodlum, then so be it. It is perfectly natural for the very human instinct of self-preservation and/or species preservation to kick in when someone is being brutally attacked. In essence, it really doesn’t matter how much force is used in order to get out alive.

Also, much of the public already understands that there are plenty of bad or very confused people out in the world who may have a very poor grasp of reality or who have absolutely no regard for human life, even their own. Consequently, deadly force may very well be the only way to end a precarious situation. And using such means may be unpleasant but it is definitely necessary if the situation warrants its use.

But not everybody agrees with that approach.

There are pacifists who abhor the use of any form of force even if it used defensively.

Even though I am a “law and order” conservative, I personally feel that I can respect such a belief only when it is espoused by a true pacifist. A genuine pacifist will allow themselves and their family members to get the beaten, gang raped, mutilated, and even murdered because they do not want the police to actually seriously hurt or kill the thugs who are doing it. They know exactly what law enforcement will do to such hoodlums who are in the process of committing a violent crime, thus they refuse to ask the police to get involved.

That doesn’t mean that they don’t want criminals restrained and prosecuted; they just don’t want them harmed.

The reason I can respect pacifists is because they actually believe in what they preach. Real pacifism is a very difficult ethical standard to adhere to and even harder to comprehend especially when it involves your own family being savagely attacked but these pacifists still choose to follow the dictates of their conscience even in the most dreadful of circumstances. Although I disagree with their moral philosophy, I do hold a very high opinion for anyone that is truly devoted to their sense of right and wrong. I do not have a problem with that.

What I do have a problem with are the people of the Left Wing who “do the talk” but cannot “do the walk” when it comes to pacifism and rejecting violence.

For instance, such noisy Liberals vociferously denounce the police whenever they use fatal force even if it is used to stop a violent crime. They constantly criticize law enforcement about deadly force and are very vocal in their demands. Add the race factor into it and then everything becomes ugly.

And what these Liberals hate the most are the ordinary law-abiding citizens who own a firearm for the purpose of protecting their family in their own house. Most of the Left Wing believes that guns are dangerous and they think that even the responsible citizens who own them are also just as dangerous as the hoodlums. Although they feel that it is bad enough that law enforcement uses fatal force against thugs, they loathe the idea of ordinary people using a gun protect themselves and their families.

However, here is my problem with that. Many of the same Liberals who incessantly criticize the police and responsible gun owners will not hesitate for one moment to call the cops if they themselves or their own family members are being victimized in a violent crime or are under the threat of it. They know exactly what the police will do in order to stop such an incident if the situation warrants using lethal force.

These types of Liberals are false pacifists.

They love to talk about peace and non-violence while they endlessly criticize the military, law enforcement, and responsible gun owners, yet when it comes to their own self-preservation, they will immediately call the cops in order to save their own hides. These Liberals are not willing to allow themselves and their family members to get the beaten, gang raped, mutilated, and murdered. In fact, they are perfectly willing to allow the police to do their job even if it means using deadly force.

That doesn’t make sense to me. These false pacifists detest guns and the people who use them, including the police, yet they are still going to call the cops in the event of an emergency knowing full well that law enforcement may end up using fatal force to stop a violent crime.

There are number of people who support gun control because they feel that society will be safer with very tight restrictions on firearms or by completely eliminating them altogether even for responsible law-abiding citizens. Although I disagree with that point of view, I feel that these supporters are very much open to a healthy debate on the issue because there is a consensus that something ought to be done with violent criminals and that the police should be well-equipped to use whatever force is necessary in a dangerous situation.

But my beef is with the hypocrites; the false pacifists who want to have it both ways. That is, they coddle criminals while criticizing law enforcement, guns, and responsible gun owners. Some of these Liberals truly feel that a criminal should not be harmed at all and that lethal force should never be utilized regardless of the circumstance. They can chant their mantra of peace and non-violence while denouncing war and police shootings but they are just as dependent on the bravery of quick thinking cops as the rest of us are.

Any opinions or views expressed herein belong solely to the author and does not represent any employer, organization, political party, governmental agency, or any other entity and do not necessarily reflect the views of the site owner or its participants.