I’m not trying to start shit. This is The Cigar Lounge and I expect everyone to have discussions like civilized people here. So, with the preamble out of the way, I saw this come across my facebook feed and it provoked some thought on my part.
Since we are now after the jump, my short answer is: disagree. What would be a situation where you are pointing a gun at a police officer and you are the victim?
Before I go answering my own question, let me take a minute and analyze this scenario. You pointed a gun at a police officer and got shot. In order for you to not be a victim, then the police officer would be justified in shooting you. That would therefore assume that a police officer is always in the right. This is obviously not true and the ultimate reason why I disagree.
Now, on to offering examples of when someone could have pointed a gun at a police officer, gotten shot, and was still a victim. The least assuming is the case of friendly fire: an armed civilian and a police officer are in the same area, at the ready the civilian and police officer see each other, police officer shoots civilian by mistake. Oops, friendly fire victim who pointed a gun at a police officer.
Something more insidious is of the police officer was actually doing something wrong. Whether it be abuse of power or corruption or whatever, there’s the whole “get off my lawn” aspect of being able to defend one’s property. The police more than anyone should know that if they don’t have a warrant, they are trespassing on your property.
Lastly, there is, in my opinion, the spirit of the second amendment situation in which you would be a victim if you were shot by a police officer while/for pointing a gun at them. Unjust authority. The police officer may just be following orders in an unjust cause of which you (and hopefully others) are a supporter.
This last scenario, though unlikely, is in my opinion one of the reasons the second amendment exists in the first place. In my opinion, again, the reason it stays around is that Americans have decided that it extends to their right to defend themselves.
So, what are your thoughts on this scenario?