"In regard to the legitimate character of the ruling authority and its right to decide the questions that arise." Consensus, in this view, becomes merely a synonym for legitimacy. Others speak of consensus as a sense of solidarity or social cohesion arising from a common ethos or heritage, which unites men into a community. Political scientists have most frequently employed the term to designate a state of agreement about the "fundamental values" or "rules of the game" considered essential for constitutional government.

            In looking at the above excerpt from this week’s reading you can’t help but think about the most prevalent topic in current events at this time. Are the police abusing their power? Should they be help more accountable for their actions? What is to be said about the people who are rioting in the streets in protest of the recent Grand Jury decisions?

            These are very difficult questions to answer without overgeneralizing in many instances. To lump all “police” together in one group would seem categorically unfair. Obviously all police officers are not the same, they do not think the same nor act the same way, but there can be no doubt, in light of recent events that some may be overstepping their bounds and not acting within the confines of the law that they are sworn to enforce. At no time would I ever consider taking away from the police the fact that they put their lives on the line every day in order to do their job but that doesn’t ever give them the right to act outside the law and take someone else’s life in their own hands. I believe that due to the dangerousness of their work they have every right to protect themselves however necessary, and will admit that, being human, at times of duress adrenalin and emotion may cloud their thinking but this is where their training comes in. They are trained to follow procedures and not to allow their emotions get in the way of what is right and what is legal.

            In saying all of that, there is no doubt that mistakes, based on split-second decisions will happen, but these should be obvious. The cases that have recently gone before the grand Jury went there because it was not obvious that what happened wasn’t a mistake caused by a split second lapse in judgment but rather a total abuse of power. I believe that for this they should be held accountable to the same standard, if not a higher one that everyone else in this society. Certainly this does not appear to be what has happened in recent cases.

            In instances like this it is not only the people’s right to speak out against their government, it is their obligation to do so. But just as the police should have to operate within the limits of the law so should the population who protest their actions.  The constitution guarantees us the right to peacefully assemble and protest. Obviously when the Framers wrote this, they had never even conceived of looting in the streets. When the populous resorts to this sort of action they have begun a rapid downward spiral as a society. Nothing can be accomplished by this sort of action.  What is necessary is for the people to gather together peacefully, in numbers and to speak out against what is happening and demand that changes be made, that the police be held accountable for their actions and held to the standard of the law, but this must be done in accordance with the law otherwise the protesters are no better that that which they are protesting.

            There is no doubt that the system is broken, but it is still not beyond repair. Action must be taken and it must happen soon. If we allow this downward spiral to continue then society will slowly descend back to a “state of nature,” the very beginning… Is that what it will take to fix things – a total collapse of the system so it can be rebuilt from the foundation up? It’s a frightening thought but not out of the realm of possibility if things continue to go in the present direction.