Good way to look at it. Good read for those who do and those who don’t own / carry firearms. I have been very conscious of the change in the way that I feel with regards to the government. They are there for a reason and are needed, but not for handouts to the auto makers who have gotten themselves into the situation they are in. I don’t believe that they should be the financial life raft for business. The banks that are now more cautious with lending money are hurt because the government told them they can't refuse loans to those who may not qualify for them. Anyway my rant…. Law enforcement and those who have chosen to dedicate their life to it are to be commended for that choice. When the $#!% hits the fan we call them and they rush into danger... They can’t however be in all places at all times... This is the problem and has always been the problem. Now more than ever with federal and state budget cuts the police force most people depend on will shrink. In the harsh economic times ahead some people are going to choose crime as a means of survival. I live about an hour west of Boston and the police are pleading with people not to leave items in vehicles that will “cause people to break into their vehicles”… Gotta love that…
If I were to be violently assaulted and not armed, I would have to hope that I would survive the attack, hope that I could identify the offender, and then pray that when an officer was to arrest the suspect he/she remains calm, diligent, and crosses the T’s and dots I’s. If the suspect is then found guilty of the assault they will be remanded to the custody of the state. I don’t believe that they will be rehabilitated. The term closer to the truth is re-educated. I’ll explain. Once incarcerated the scared and often vulnerable offender will seek out those that will offer them protection. They will most likely find members of their own race. They will find members of a gang that will offer them refuge and safety for a price, servitude… They will be re-educated in the ways of crime. They will be made smarter criminals and better connected criminals. If and when they are released their servitude will continue out on the streets. And all of this re-education is at a cost to me the assaulted taxpayer. Now back to the beginning… If I was to be violently assaulted and I was armed I would have to make a decision to stop the assault. That does not mean that I would kill the assaulter, I would use deadly force if necessary to stop the assault. If their death is the result of my decision to defend myself, then that’s the result of a poor decision made by the assailant to assault me. I’m being responsible for my rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. Those who choose to take the protection of their lives as a responsibility should be commended as well..
Thoughts and opinions welcome…
__________________ "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes". "Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants". -- Thomas Jefferson
Last edited by 6shootercarry; 08-14-2009 at 12:00 AM.
Reason: fix spelling error
|