Whenever I suggest to anyone that punishment should be greater for someone killing a policeman, I always get the question, why is a policeman’s life worth more than… say a six-month-old baby?

First, the question is a red heiring. The person asking it generally does not mean to challenge my idea based on logic but emotion. They don’t like the law. In some cases, they place little import on those that are recently born. They simply don’t like the idea of a law that protects police.

It does go far beyond that though. Someone shooting a policeman does not respect the law. The shooting of the officer proves it. They use an element of society that just loves to rebel against the law and the uniform represents the law. Let’s keep in mind, those officers really represent us. When they pour liquids on an officer, that is a visual display of their lack of respect of the law and us. It is open visual rebellion. And, when they shoot a policeman, that is the ultimate disrespect against us, the law and those who enforce it.

There is another aspect that many don’t think of. That baby is not intentionally putting his life in danger to protect society. Okay. I get it. The baby is incapable of such a thing and is considered the essence of innocents. However, that officer has taken an oath to protect people, especially such as the baby. Without the police, how would we be able to hold on to our property or our lives… or the lives of our children?

The especially good part about such a law is that it would act as an invisible shield. It is a good thing that the criminal think twice before shooting a policeman. It just might stop people from indiscriminately executing them. More important, with that invisible shield, he can do his job better, knowing that the criminal will be less likely to use his gun on a man wearing a badge. And, by the way, if the criminal is less likely to shoot, then the officer is less likely to have to shoot. So, it sort of helps the criminal too.