Good Morning EVERYBODY! Jeez, been a while----- and after all that time away and traveling back home yet a second time since Christmas already, I find not much has evolved for the better in our world. Not collectively mind you, but a few skirmishes afoot seem to be the "same ole same ole."Thanks for this insight into the realities of this issue, sounds pretty clear.
Chosen,----I am not picking on you nor would I. So, initially like many others here, I was happy to have read the article you provided, though extremely saddened by it's turn. Not alot to glean in facts, but such a sad and unnecessary tragedy. Did the officer(s) identify themselves(Ruby Ridge)? Does Virginia law allow a person to shoot first and ask questions later, either side of the door? And, did the shooter fire through the door? Being not far from that region and a southern Gal, I found the whole event so pointless and would like to believe the officer was not in the wrong. I think after all the facts are out, we would likely be talking about a total moron with a gun regardless of the law or the tactics use by that particular department. My Mr. spoke to a local county officer about this, as far as a similar case here within Iowa Law. Not actually a case but a "for instance" Plus as he said and we agree, it's not the gun, but the owner. It's not the car, but the drunken fool behind the wheel, or in one case not the nail gun but..............And, in that same regard here in Iowa? This officer states that "All One Needs To Commit A Justifiable Deadly act of Self Defense, Is the REASONABLE Fear for the Life Of Family Or One's Self. Be the weapon of offense, a knife, gun, club, chair or a pointed finger inside a jacket pocket. Officer: " The element of equal force does not apply as far as the officer taking your statement is concerned, because your fear for the loss of your life is more important, and most crooks don't let you know how they intend to kill you or a loved one. Especially if the attacker is clearly within your private domain." "Now later, should the attacker, his or her family lay claim to a suit, the Judge and Civil court might disagree." " And finally, if the potential assailant is fleeing, don't shoot no matter what !"
But all in all, it's become a cliche' though true, "A good Carpenter doesn't blame his tools." and "guns don't kill people, people do. Accidents, self defense, robbery, burglary, crimes of passion, and occasional "Hunter gets shot by Prey" cases, most all involve the gun. Many involve various other forms of weapons as well. But sadly, your comment regarding the gun and it's use just sounded so off point. Reminiscient of a fearful society, one of a free people willing to toss away any right to defend one's self and family with deadly force, through the use of the most effective form of defense we have. One that generally equalizes innocents as prey AND, guaranteed by the constitution. I can see that you are saddened and shocked, as everyone else, and I do understand the quandary, your point is that of many others throughout our nation. Though you are correct, that in this case the gun served no one. It was however, perhaps wrong to inflect that shade of "Gun Grabber" mentality within that terrible act of blatant stupidity and carelessness. That man simply shouldn't have owned a gun and as a result of his actions, the officer will be sorely missed and that idiot will likely never again see a day of freedom.
Again, I intend no disrespect nor wish to pummel anyone, but must disagree with the basic points your post indicated regarding the GUN. That "tool" like any other can be used for good or bad. Just so sad that we have folks in this world that prefer the latter, and the gun gets the blame. The right to express to agree or disagree is cherished and guaranteed again by the constitution and understanding that is most important, while owning and using that gun legally is guaranteed by that same constitution.
God Bless.



