2008 Part II: Candidates, Since When Is Self-defense A Crime?
Since the concept of even-handedness, so-called conflict resolution, zero-tolerance policies in school and workplace, and assigning mutual blame in fighting.
Conflict and self-defense have been put in the wrong perspective for decades, and this leaves a dark void for the non-gun owner families who believe in law and order but, as a substantial difference with gunnies, aren’t as prepared to meet a violent encounter.
I say this because of an increase in articles pointing to the unpreparedness of the average Joe and Josephine Citizen when facing danger – and then the penalties from the system thereafter. When self-defense is a crime. Or a tort. At the very least, one’s world can be turned upside down twice: once by the encounter itself and then by the system that can wrongly assign anger or excessive force to the reasonable actions of the victim.
But one solution works. It’s brave, it’s politically smart, and it’s long overdue.
The Stand Your Ground laws making their way around the nation address this problem of double exposure nicely. Where some localities have vague rules for what self-defense is, there’s trouble for the victim who responds in purpose to grave danger. The Stand Your Ground Laws address this by clarifying that anyone forcibly entering your home, workplace or occupied vehicle have the presumption of intent to do great bodily harm. Very, very positive for the People. Not so good for the criminal.
But then there’s an interesting new detail. The Stand Your Ground law rids the victim of the legal nightmare that had ordinarily followed when one acted in that reasonable apprehension of grave danger. The actions might have been more than reasonable and lawful, but a civil suit could easily follow anyway thanks to the PC infiltration of wrong-headed ideas of conflict, mutual combat, anger and presumptions of excessive force. As it stands now, unreasonable actions or over-reaction are still subject to investigation, and that is as it should be, but if they are reasonable, then there shouldn’t be a civil suit at all. Second-guessing people before-the-fact as the PC influence does is counter-intuitive and destructive to society in predatory political gain.
The concept of the Stand Your Ground overall philosophy is based on the Castle Doctrine that a person’s home is his castle as an American value worthy of protecting. It also means that the person is worth protecting. This should be uniform nationwide.
Put another way, official recognition that the individual is sovereign.
Stand Your Ground philosophy as this affirmation grows represents a defeat for the Left in this country in the area of violent crime and perhaps even their stupid idea of conflict and the equally stupid allegation of settling disputes in anger – a disarmament strategy. The defeat comes in the form of losing crime as a political football, and in uplifting Independence as an ideal. Resolve crime better and better by way of personal Independence and you humiliate the Left in America and impeach all of their arguments – such as zero-tolerance and bullying with that stupid mutual blame or conflict component.
[One of the reasons I advocate the repeal of all gun laws is to permit personal Independence to shine through: as responsible people do the right thing when they must act – and they usually do unless cheated out of it pre-emptively and politically – Independence impeaches the need for many national social programs based on a theory of violence. Defeat violence by acts of personal independence of the people instead of a law against the reasonable response of the people and you defeat many stupid social policies based on the lie of people’s stupidity and of violence. People aren’t as stupid as the Left presumes, and Independence exposes the lie.]
For further details, search keywords Castle Doctrine.
Without this definition in favor of the person, protections are spotty and self-defense meant civil damages or even charged as a crime, very costly to the victim long after the violence itself. When self-defense is a tort or crime, it is nothing more than another leftist predatory practice preying on the sovereign citizen. Stand Your Ground unburdens the citizen and recognizes sovereignty. Stand Your Ground now becomes Hornbook.
Communities adopting Stand Your Ground laws are freer now to accept and to state publicly the truth that refusing to be a victim is good. You can’t legally or rightly give justice to the criminal (even-handedness or so-called compassion) at the expense of the victim. The criminal finds justice at his own expense, perhaps not the justice he’d bargained for in his crime. The victim gets to find justice, too, also at the criminal’s expense. After all, the bad guy should be picking up the check, not the victim.
2008 Candidates: support Stand Your Ground laws. Take the side of the targeted citizen and remove penalties for fighting back. Stand Your Ground Laws take the side of the community – your constituents – and make a good plank in your platform with a superb solution to a law and order issue.
A Stand Your Ground law should be part of a larger Pilot Program repealing all gun laws for five years. The entire concept will prove that the Independence of the would-be victim is smarter and more societally effective in fighting crime than any anti-gun law ever could be.
And that’s good for the country.
In fact, that is the country.
______________________________
Violent crime is the cash crop of some officials to farm. Independence is the weedkiller. See www.TransferOfWealth.net
Â
| More from John Longenecker
Stumble It!
