Mr. Rick Barker suggests (Jan. 29 letter) that we must “do something” or “stop doing something” whenever a law enforcement officer issues an order. That is vague, ambiguous and incorrect as a matter of history, law and common sense. Police authority has limits and individuals are not obligated to follow unlawful orders without questioning them or, in some cases, refusing to obey.
Years ago, I was lawfully recording video in a public place when an officer ordered me to stop filming and surrender my videotape. I calmly and respectfully refused and asked whether I was being detained or arrested. I was not. The officer left without my recording. The encounter illustrates an important principle: A uniform does not convert an unlawful command into a lawful one. Knowing one’s legal rights, staying calm and being respectful — but firm — matters.
During a brush fire next to Stevenson Ranch years ago, a resident disobeyed a California Highway Patrol officer’s order not to drive up the street to rescue his stranded wife as the fire approached their home. Prosecutors charged him with disobeying a lawful order. A jury acquitted him. The verdict reflected common sense and legal precedent: Not every law enforcement order must be obeyed simply because it is given.
Mr. Barker also misstates history. The Civil War began in April 1861; the 13th Amendment was not ratified until December 1865, months after the war ended. This is not a trivial error — it undermines the historical premise on which his argument relies.
I am unaware of any elected official urging citizens to violently interfere with law enforcement. Finally, while accounts differ about the circumstances Mr. Barker indirectly references, placing a 5-year-old child in a detention facility makes America look neither strong nor just. It only makes our nation look cruel.
Philip Wasserman
Stevenson Ranch
