SavannahMann
Platinum Member
- Nov 16, 2016
- 14,540
- 6,818
- 365
First we should understand that the term, "lawful order," originated in the military and is a common component of military jargon. Each and every function of the military involves the issuing of orders by superiors and the dutiful obedience to orders by subordinates.Isn't any order given by police a lawful order?
Too many civil police "officers," for one psychologically warped reason or other, come to think of themselves as the equivalent of commissioned or non-commissioned military officers. In this distorted sense of their authority they eventually come to regard all ordinary citizens as subordinates who are required to dutifully obey their orders -- any orders, any time, just like in the military.
Some of these deluded egotists are inclined to become enraged when some ordinary citizen has the audacity to question their authority or, worse, fails to dutifully obey their orders. This is a situation which frequently leads to the excessive and/or unlawful use of force -- as in the topic example.
While civil police do have the authority to issue some orders when circumstances call for it, their level of authority over the general public is limited to a very narrow range of circumstances.
Except that soldiers are punished for obedience to illegal orders. See Abu Ghraib. The soldiers were following orders from the CIA. The Superiors told them to and then left to insure they were not implicated. Each of those soldiers had a moral and legal duty to refuse the orders. Each of them had a legal duty to say no.