Hacker News Reader

Comment by wbronitsky | Hacker News Reader

> Do what you're told.

Why do we all need to conform to every order from every police officer, even, and sometimes especially, when that order is unlawful?

When the police are using unlawful orders to escalate violence, and then justify that violence by asserting that one was not complying with their order, which was unlawful, or otherwise stated illegal, is that not wrong?

I do not believe that any law, or logic, supports a situation in which anyone must "do what [they are] told" in this context. This argument can be restated as "do what I say, no matter what, or die". This is pure terror enacted by the state against its population.

View on HN

It’s a jaundiced view but a lot of American society seems predicated around the idea that the person with power is correct. Whether that’s a policeman or corporate shareholders or your obviously incompetent president.

As someone who recently sat through jury selection, it's a remarkably common view. So many American citizens revere the badge, are willing to trust the person in uniform despite evidence to the contrary, and automatically assume the person sitting in the defendant's chair is guilty.

Based on your lucid comments in this thread I’m guessing you were not selected for the jury.

Between the 2 attorneys and the judge, one of them might have been disbarred if I was allowed on a jury. I was in the jury box as a potential juror for a few days, but was challenged out.

I didn't say always, but when there is riot police and they're telling you to move you should definitely do what they tell you.

Interesting, but I think when riot police in particular are giving you an order it is probably the most important time to disobey.

Yes, because staying put on the train tracks when you hear the train whistle is a good idea. This reminds of those "self-defense" classes my elementary school used to do- they're not martial arts, they're practical ways to keep yourself safe. Should you cross the street the second the traffic signal gives you the go-ahead without even looking up the road? Of course not. No amount of right-of-way or moral authority will restore your shattered body. So no, staying in place when you're clearly in danger and are actively being warned about this danger is a pretty stupid idea. Enjoy being a martyr though.

I expect police officers to have more options than a train that can’t stop in time or even turn left or right

“This is a lighthouse. Your call.”

This is exactly the same wrong point again. A human with a badge is not similar to a lighthouse. It’s a person with agency, when they beat, shoot, strangle or arrest another person they make a choice.

Lighthouses don’t.

So you've made your call, so confident in feeling you're in the right. Nice knowing you, "admiral".

I thought a bit about this argument here, and I just want to sum it up, so we can understand where this landed.

The sum of the final argument is “I believe that you should do whatever the gunman says, so much so that I don’t care if they kill you”, directed at a commenter here.

You need to think about it a little more.

In the story, the admiral is conceited about his position so much so that he believes that he has the right not to understand the situation. Which is exactly why the commenter is in the stated position about the "righteousness" of their argument.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com