|Subscribe | Email Us | CFP Books | Letters to the Editor|
CommentsMy youngest daughter refuses to have a weapon in her home.
I suggested she might buy a can of wasp spray. It's still legal to own it and can reach a distance from 15-22 feet depending on the brand and costs between $3.00 to $4.00 a can depending on whether or not it's on sale.
Posted by MizDixie on 01/03 at 10:51 PM | #
Terrific article. I'm beginning to realize that it's all connected: the consideration of individual rights versus group rights is congruent with the opposing notions of capitalism (from each according to his use of goods and services and to each according to his production of goods and services) versus socialism (from each according to his ability and to each according to his needs). We are in the fight of our lives and articles like this help. We need to spread the word.
Posted by Tigerous on 01/03 at 09:31 PM | #
Love your article, Mr. Greenfield -- you have struck a cord of truth and common sense that most politicians, and ALL of the progressives, simply cannot even imagine.
Thank You for your efforts -- please keep up the good work.
Posted by LM on 01/03 at 06:46 PM | #
In the time between discovering you need help, find the cell phone, dial the number, and wait for help, you will still be dead and the perpetrator gone. There will never be enough capable shooters to counter the numbers of criminals just waiting for a target. Moreover in vast regions of the country police are unavailable for rapid protection. Personal gun ownership and expertise in shooting become indispensable for self protection from both man and prowling animals. In rural farms that protection involves large numbers of animals that complicate protection. The odds are always stacked against the property protector because the infiltrator has the element of surprise.
Police generally arrive in time to survey the scene. If injury or death have occurred these facts are documented and ambulance, if necessary, called. I do not consider this to be acceptable.
It is really not possible to prevent harm when criminals carry guns. I would make carrying a gun in connection with any crime to be punishable by life imprisonment. Use of the gun in connection with crime would be made punishable by death. These realities should then be made explicitly clear by education in schools, television, news media and attachments in welfare and other government publications. With blanket coverage of the new weapons reality there should be no legal argument that the perpetrator did not know...other than perhaps proof that the perpetrator had just arrived from a distant planet. No gentle and drawn out defense will suffice in the task of making violence against another human unlikely.
Posted by Robert Fanning on 01/03 at 05:40 PM | #
As noted in this case: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia
By a 4-3 decision the court decided that Warren was not entitled to remedy at the bar despite the demonstrable abuse and ineptitude on the part of the police because no special relationship existed. The court stated that official police personnel and the government employing them owe no duty to victims of criminal acts and thus are not liable for a failure to provide adequate police protection unless a special relationship exists. The case was properly dismissed by the trial court for failure to state a claim and the case never went to trial.
TWO phone calls to the police went unanswered and they suffered 14 hours of sexual abuse. The police are not liable for failure to protect, interesting thing is that a special relationship does exist. If they paid any taxes whatsoever to the county or township and that money used for payment of the police then are they not paying for protection? Even so, it appears that only protect their own, I prefer not to encounter reliance upon a phone call that will make me a victim.
Posted by Nicholas on 01/03 at 05:08 PM | #
The Left only considers an Idea "rational" if it is something they can control and then Ration.
Posted by Capt. TJ Strong on 01/03 at 02:22 PM | #
Power To the People
Posted by Daniel Greenfield on Jan 3, 2013 at 11:33 AM
Gun controllers determine that each man, woman and child shall have the right to spend the last 30 seconds of their life begging the government to save them
At a Brady Center event to “Prevent Gun Violence by Jodie Foster Fans from Accidentally Hitting White House Press Secretaries in the Head” the Brady Center Legal Action Project Director asked retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens whether having a right to a cell phone might be a more universal form of self-defense than gun ownership.
“Maybe you have some kind of constitutional right to have a cell phone with a predialed 911 number at your bedside, and that might provide you with a little better protection than a gun, which you’re not used to using,” Justice Stevens mumbled.More...
Post a Comment on: Power To the People
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
Next entries comments: The View from the Bottom of a Fiscal Abyss
Previous entries comments: Just one cup in today’s tidal wave
Note from the Editor:
This section is for comments from readers of canadafreepress.com.
Please don't assume that Canada Free Press agrees with or endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand.
Most Shared CFP stories
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2014 the individual authors.
Site Copyright 1997-2014 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement
Powered by ExpressionEngine