Kathy:
I am always so impressed at your understanding of world history and current events. Obviously you must read a lot more non-fiction than fiction, and you are inspiring me to put away the crime dramas for a spell and attack something that has historical value. I will though say with the new online audio-book library, I finished Echo Park by Michael Connelly, a very good story following a repeat main character this time hunting a serial killer while dealing with political corruption - the vast majority of material I escape into is crime, court room and forensic pathology novels. I rented out two books this week and start working 3-11 shift tomorrow, seems I may easily finish the second book before it expires Saturday.
Back to my point. I rarely agree with Jerrymac, but getting his 180 degree views is a wonderful (albeit head scratching experience) that I wouldn't trade for the world. I have to say Kathy, although we say things very differently, I come off the cuff with personal beliefs where you add specific data to back your posts up - we often agree on many issues, even though for different reasons. Not that agreeing is important, but to hear your views are fascinatingly educational to me and often help curb or modify my own future thinking. Again, I'm not right although I voice my beliefs, having your input often sharpens my thinking as much as Jerrymacs often reinforces it.
I enjoy radio hosts from the far ends of left and right, and ponder the glimmer of someone in the middle making a stronghold in radio - we can argue the positions of the far right to the far left and as (I think you mentioned the other day) Alex Jones and Prison-planet who represents our only true third party, the Paranoid theorist Party, interestingly enough I find him entertaining, mostly because I think he does his homework well and has very good spontaneous recall. His paranoid tendencies often remind me of someone, I can't spontaneously recall who
But I say paranoid in jest, the fact that various concepts of freedom is a milestone of our democracy. We fight for such rights yet limit them almost hap-hazardously these days in fear of others using our freedoms to anilate us. It is indeed an oxymoron of modern society.
Yes, as was asked openly at the start of this topic or a similar topic - who was it that said I don't mind giving up some degree of freedom IF I feel that it increase the safety of the masses - that was me. I know believing that DNA profiling of all newborns sounds too Big Brother to some, I believe it is a way to safely improve the loss of lives and cost of prosecution in the next generation and since it would be done blanketly across the board, how does it inflict on personal rights?
Saying, why bother inspecting 2% of all cargo entering US ports since inspecting 100% is theoretically infeasible is like saying saving 2% of all cancer victims by moderate doses of radiation isn't worth the effort. If life and liberty go hand in hand in our society, then any attempt to better either is a worthy gesture. I wonder though, if we had JUST invested the Trillions spent on this war on REAL Homeland Security, the threat of terrorism would be as high, but would the enactment of it be as successful? I have only heard of spoiled plots (here in the States) since 9-11, radical groups with visions of being a blurb in the history books, spoiled through our own increased security and the efforts of other countries who have greatly increased their own technologies and surveillance.
I don't believe that taking the law in your own hands solves anything, generally. We have law enforcement for that. But police agencies, like everything else are stretched to their limits and unlike much of the world, when you break into the wrong house in the United States, you had better be prepared for the consequences. All bets are off when you walk into someone else's home, I don't think as Jorn mentioned that you can assume simple robbery is an intent. And even if it is so, what gives anyone the right to break into someone Else's home with the intent of doing any crime, no matter what the severity of intent.
I have always believed that ALTHOUGH I WOULD NOT OWN WEAPONS, I would do anything and everything to stop an intruder and after bounding him securely, take my time calling the police. I promise if the intruder lives, he will not be physically or mentally able to repeat these trespasses. You do what it takes to end a threat and level the degree of safety the law says, use equal force to neutralize the threat and no more - but I believe that to be fiction in our land where nightly news stories usually start off with POLICE OFFICER SHOT DEAD.
Just last night (or night before) here in New Jersey, an off-duty 23 year old cop went into a late night take-out place and ordered chicken. When he pulled out his wallet, someone behind him tried to rob the officer and a fight ensued. The animal pulled a gun and pumped several shots into the cop, killing him in cold blood, then escaped. This is the world we live in, not some fantasy dot on the Globe where police never come in time, emergency operators hang up because you used the f-word in a moment of shear terror, but a land where your ability to protect yourself is the last thing you want to exercise, but the first thing you will preform to survive.
Strangely, I feel safe in my tiny community of 3000, but that feeling is just wishful thinking - the bad guys are out there in great number and the chance of you encountering them is far greater than ever hitting a lottery - survival isn't a concept, it is a reality and peace is not a reality but a wish. None of us can expect either when we are out numbered or over-powered, even given "Extraordinary Powers" doesn't make a cop a superman, the only supermen on Earth are ourselves when dealing with the scum of the world.
