Quote:
|
Originally Posted by analog
dksuddeth:
Your words about the right to bear arms and the duty to retreat have absolutely nothing to do with the article you posted.
Furthermore, the actions of one officer operating under state pro-arrest guidelines choosing not to arrest the man is hardly indicative of a systemic loss of law enforcement.
Don't use this unfortunate event to try and shed attention on your general grievances with the government and whoever else you're pissed off at this week. This article has nothing to do with nanny states, gun control, duty to retreat laws, or any loss of personal rights or freedoms. Not every thread is your personal soap-box, and your anti-police rhetoric is tired.
|
pray tell, in your mind, what is this 'unfortunate event' supposed to be about?
Is it how we should pity the ex-boyfriend for being a victim of child abuse and sexual molestation as a teen, therefore he shouldn't be held responsible for his actions?
Is it that the cop had no duty to arrest the guy because he didn't actually catch him in the act of raping his ex-girlfriend?
Because I think that all of my points tie in real nice and neat with the fact that for nearly 80 years we've had the notions of 'we don't need guns', 'guns are for law enforcement', 'cops are here to protect us', 'the government is her to help us', and my personal favorite, 'we as mere citizens can't take care of ourselves so we need to let the 'professionals' do it for us.
See, this happened in Vermont, a state with practically zero gun laws, yet a woman was assaulted, violently, in her own home and a biased media that either refuses to mention that she owned a gun or she didn't own one at all because she's been brainwashed by a government and anti-self defense groups that she'd be in more danger by having one than she would by enduring multiple rapes and beatings and calling the police later.
She, along with over half the population of this country, have the mistaken belief that all they need to do is call 911 and the cops will ride in to save the day, just in the nick of time. That the courts will protect our rights at all times, in accordance with the first amendment, by hearing our redress of grievances against a government body and siding with our rights, therefore ensuring that a government body would work harder to serve us instead of itself.
Analog, you've done nothing more than help perpetuate a herd mentatlity among the people of this country, spreading the mistaken belief that the government will protect us like the shepherd does for his sheep. Thanks for playing.