The semantics of being labeled as a "Law Enforcement Officer" / by kevin murray

Many of those that work for the Department of Homeland Security, or the Department of Justice, or the Department of the Interior, and the Department of Agriculture are considered to be "Law Enforcement Officers", of which, this title as utilized in the present day, appears to be in most instances, a misnomer.  That is to say, that anyone that takes it upon themselves to label or be labeled as a "Law Enforcement Officer" should actually be required to know the law, to the same level or close to the same approximation as someone that practices the law, such as, an Attorney of the Law.  This means, that all those that currently are considered to be Law Enforcement Officers should forego such a designation, unless they have a law degree, or until such time that an accredited independent agency creates an exam that actually tests the applicants' knowledge and understanding of the law.


In point of fact, those that are given the duty, so to speak, to uphold and to enforce the law, but have not demonstrated in fact that they actually know the law, should not be called or considered to be Law Enforcement Officers.  That is not to say, that some of these public servants aren't very cognizant and savvy of the laws, of which, no doubt, some of them would indeed pass a thorough law exam; nor is that to say, that the people currently designed as Law Enforcement Officers have not completed and subsequently passed the prerequisites in order to perform their job; but it is to say, that those that are labeled as Law Enforcement Officers should and must actually know the law, of which the current educational and exam requirements mandated do not thoroughly test this knowledge or lack thereof.


Anytime that those that are given the authority by this government to arrest, interrogate, and to forcefully stop citizens and inhabitants of this country; the authorized person or the agency so doing so, should actually know what the law is, how that law should be applied, and where and when it is to be applied.  The day in which the primary attribute to hire officers of the law, was their physical size and strength, should no longer be applicable, for its importance has diminished, considerably.  Rather, since so many of these officers are armed to the teeth to begin with, the most relevant attribute that is needed, is good discernment, and good discernment comes from the actual knowledge of the law.


America is a country that provides its citizens with many rights, of which, in summary of those rights, they are basically the freedom of its citizens to be about their business and to express themselves freely in their actions and in their words, without unjustified interference from enforcement officers.  It is critical to recognize that in this country, you are always presumed to be innocent, yet, the law as so often applied by enforcement officers actually appears to typically presume guilt.  So too, the mindset of too many enforcement officers is to forget that their fiduciary duty is to serve the people, of which these officers lack of understanding of Constitutional law, serves to undermine their legitimacy; for surely those that wish to enforce the law, must first know it.