OBG,
I think the officer was in his cruiser, the cruiser took the hits. People see their life falling apart and LE stops them from going home to do something about it(their thoughts, not mine), rational thought can easily be tossed aside.

samhain,
A Glock G-19 is a nice size, not too small, but certainly not big. I'd prefer .45ACP or a 12 ga shotgun in some situations, but the G-19 is reliable with all 9mm JHP ammo I've tried and recoil is mild.

Smart Rule. Driver floors it, the officer in front of it will understand what pain is, even if he gets the chance to fire. Sigh

I'll tell you why.

True event.

Back in the floods of 2004, right about as the river is about to crest, a guy comes to the check point with a Kayak on his roof, and demands that we let him through, he's a resident, he's going to check on his house, which we know is already under water.
There's leaking 800 gallons propane tanks and whole trees and oil and paint and swearage in the water, it's a mess. The river is running at about 30 MPH, FAST and the shoreline is collapsing in places.
But he's got ID, his home is on the river. We let him through.

Exactly 14 minutes later, we get a 911 call for a water rescue. This dumbass got 50 yards from where he put in, got pushed into the top of a tree, was stuck and the water is still coming up. He managed to call 911 and then dropped his phone in the river.

So me and two other guys end up in a boat, with the bow facing upriver, throttle nearly wide open just to hold us in place under him. In case we lost engine, we had a 600' line secured to the bow and a crew up on the rapidly vanishing shore ready to pull us back up with an engine if needed. It was a fast rescue - we cut the limb of the tree he was stuck in with a chainsaw and let him drop a bit into the boat, but we were mad.

Later that day I realized we were also idiots for letting him through, because we will not ignore a call for a living person in distress, so the only other option we have is to not let them get into distress.

The point is this - in times of clear and present danger the normal rules of freedom are - supposed to be temporarily - suspended. Mandatory evacuations are difficult to do, and nobody wants them. But when they happen, they mean mandatory.

Just FYI: You pull a gun at a checkpoint and you're going to the morgue in multiple sandwich-sized ziplock bags. No joke.

Thanks for posting this, Martin. My take-away is pretty much as you stated in your original post: good idea to be prepared to evacuate with key documents, etc. at the ready. I need to do this now.

Regarding evacuations, my personal tendencies are:

1. comply with authority
2. distrust authority

I realize specific situations require on-the-spot decisions. I realize foolish or distraught people sometimes rush into harm's way and thereby put rescuers' lives at risk.

But I am VERY wary of militarized public servants as well as hired mercenaries (e.g., Blackwater during Katrina) who are conditioned to think of citizens as "civilians" whose rights can be suspended "temporarily" for their own "protection."

Part of my readiness preparation is to plan routes, understand local laws, and to monitor local and state emergency plans.

Kudos to fellow citizens who serve honorably and who volunteer to serve.

Nishabotna, I'm with you. I'm troubled at how quickly free people relinquish their liberty to "experts" and "officials." I'm gravely concerned about the national character of the U.S.A.
-----

"Government is good at one thing: It knows how to break your legs, hand you a crutch, and say, 'See, if it weren't for the government, you wouldn't be able to walk.'" - Harry Browne, April 11, 2002

"...pull a gun at a checkpoint and you're going to the morgue in multiple sandwich-sized ziplock bags..."

Yup. How many holes will depend on how many officers are there, 'cuz most of the time, when one shoots, they all shoot...

Nice editing of your quote of my post. Who said anything about pulling a gun at a checkpoint?

OBG made it sound like the officer was standing in front of the SUV which I;m pretty sure was not the case. Samhain asked a question re firearms (What fits well in a Fatboy???) and I provided an opinion.

How did that become "You pull a gun at a checkpoint"?

Personally I don't think the citizens of the United States should ever have their rights suspended "for their own good". If they want to go into the flood zone that badly, let them. Tell them the risks and have them sign a waiver, to cover legal a$$es that might be seen as libel, telling them that NO 911/rescue will be available. They know of all the risks and consequences of their actions. If they die so be it. Darwinism at work.

-Bill Liptak

Maybe it's just me but if my rights are "temporarily suspended", so is my obligation to recognize and obey civil authority. It's a two-way street as far as I'm concerned. I certainly wouldn't be dumb enough to confront several armed men at a checkpoint but that doesn't mean I won't be going wherever I believe I need to go.

I've known more than a few LEOs who were fine ethical people but even they had to earn my trust. Given the long and consistent history of corruption and organized criminal enterprise within police departments (many of which started as sanctioned street gangs and really haven't changed much), I no longer give "the police" the benefit of doubt.

The downside to this is what if they want back in so they can loot other houses in the area? I live in a nice neighborhood, but I know it has some very bad seeds in it. I wouldn't want them roaming around knowing the cops and most people are elsewhere. How do you guarantee the people going back won't be breaking into other houses?

As for the liability waiver, maybe we could make it a requirement that they have to bring a lawyer with them into the danger zone.

-Blast