It's a very common if not universal complaint among libertarian anarchist types that police and/or other government employees shouldn't be subject to different rules from the rest of us. It seems obvious that like it or not, they are in present society.
I'm not suggesting I'm in favor or against it, just acknowledging that the rules for what's acceptable depend on what collective entity you're part of. It doesn't seem peculiar to me if there are always non-individual responsibilities to go with non-individual powers.
As the law is written, police officers in the US are not allowed to shoot or kill people in circumstances where non-police cannot.
This is why you hear the common police trope of “I feared for my life”.
In practice, of course, the prosecutors will aggressively prosecute people defending their own homes from intruders, and fail to prosecute police engaging in premeditated murder; but that of course is a different story. The legal framework, in theory, provides them no special privileges to kill.
The police, by law, are allowed to create circumstances that non-police are not.
However, even if they weren't, it's irrelevant to my point, that people, including but not limited to the police, have powers that come from their membership in an abstract entity, and it's perfectly natural for them to have regulation of those privileges as well.
It's a very common if not universal complaint among libertarian anarchist types that police and/or other government employees shouldn't be subject to different rules from the rest of us. It seems obvious that like it or not, they are in present society.
I'm not suggesting I'm in favor or against it, just acknowledging that the rules for what's acceptable depend on what collective entity you're part of. It doesn't seem peculiar to me if there are always non-individual responsibilities to go with non-individual powers.