A Broken Contract

As the magnitude of the Uvalde police department's failure and dereliction becomes more and more apparent, and as the fog of immediacy gives way to post-hoc clarity and analysis, we focus our previously generalized outrage on the cowards who chose to pin on the shield but left children to die.

In that outrage, we mustn't forget another side of that dereliction: the blockade of parents who sought to rescue their and other kids.

People often speak of a social contract - an individual's obligations to the society around him in exchange for the benefits of that society. Since this "contract," which none of us signed, is usually a statist demand to cede one's liberties and the fruits of one's labor to an unrestricted State, those of a liberty-oriented mindset tend to be skeptical.

There is a different contract, however, that even libertarians accept.

It goes like this:

The government says "we will do this on your behalf," and we accept, conditionally. Things like policing, firefighting, and the like fall into this realm. This doesn't mean we don't defend ourselves or choose not to put fires out when they start in our kitchens - but rather that when the cops and firefighters show up, we step back and let them do their jobs. When they're on the scene, it's reasonable for the government to say "no, you shouldn't take matters into your own hands, it's more apt to cause harm."

But, when government breaches the "contract," when it fails to live up to the obligation it accepted in exchange for the power we ceded, it has no moral authority to stop private citizens (e.g. parents) from going in to protect or rescue their children.

Yes, yes, I know, the cops outside may not have known that the cops inside spent an hour and 15 minutes standing outside the room in which the shooter had locked himself, while children were being shot and were bleeding out. Yes, for the first few of those 75 minutes it was prudent for police to restrain parents from entering. And, yes, all this is with the clarity of hindsight and Monday morning quarterbacking.

This is, however, part of a growing pattern: the breakdown of our institutions, one that's justifiably eroding trust in those institutions. Government actors lying to us, covering their own asses, running interference for each other, protecting the "team" before doing the right thing. We expect such repugnance from politicians, but we are seeing it more and more in law enforcement - from small-town cops to the highest echelons of the FBI. No doubt, there are countless good and "once more unto the breach" people wearing the badge (I've had the honor of knowing my share and calling some of them "friend"), but we all know and have seen that some don't deserve it and some that disgrace it.

"With great power comes great responsibility," an adage popularized by Spider-man's uncle, has drawn my skeptical eye in the past, since it, as has the "social contract," been used to demand concessions and "penance" from the successful. However, those who've sought that power, who've accepted it in exchange for the obligation to wield it in our stead, should indeed be held to that standard. While the Supreme Court has ruled, in Castle Rock v Gonzales, that a police department cannot be sued for failure to protect, the moral obligation to do so stands apart from legal technicalities. Put on the shield, accept a responsibility.

The adage should better read "With great authority comes great responsibility."

That policing isn't even in the top ten most dangerous jobs (it ranks 22nd) tells its own tale. There's a demand of respect for our protectors that relies on the presumption of assumed risk, a risk that isn't as high as that faced by the crossing guards that annoy us with their vests and handheld stop signs. Want the job? Want the image, the status, the deference? Then own the obligation, and reject and denounce those who don't.

The symbolism of the shield should not be overlooked. A shield protects. Whence the Uvalde protectors?

---

If you enjoy The Roots of Liberty, please subscribe (if you have already, thank you!), and  please recommend the blog to your friends! While I share it as much as I can on social media, subscribing ensures you won't miss a post.

If you really like The Roots of Liberty and want to help keep it rolling, please consider becoming a paying subscriber here at Substack, or at a lighter level as contributor to the blog via Patreon.

Thank you for your support!

Yours in liberty,

Peter.