I go to the home of a rich buddy, i.e. a place with alot of private land, with some other dudes, have one or two alcoholic beverages, and then pick up a shotgun to go duck hunting.
If I then, say, SHOT one of said dudes, one would think that the local constables would:
- detain me
- check my blood alcohol level
- probably charge me with reckless endangerment
Moreover, if I happened to be employed in law enforcement myself, I'd like to think that I would voluntarily submit to being detained and being tested and, since the guy is my friend, let the chips fall where they may.
You know, actually take responsibility for my actions.
Because accepting responsibility isn't just a matter of raising your hands and saying "my bad" after you cap someone with a hunting rifle. Accepting responsibility is ultimately about accepting consequences.
Of course, my name isn't Dick Cheney.
Now I know that, if my name is Dick Cheney, I can actually leave the state without undergoing any questioning or testing of any kind. And, honestly, what prosecutor or judge in his right mind would ever try to bring any kind of charges against someone named Dick Cheney.
Oh, yeah. Right. "A prosecutor or judge who feels that no man is above the law would."
John Adams, the very first Vice-President of the United States, once wrote that America must be a government of laws, not men.
How times change.