Robert Walker wrote on May 09, 2008 06:20 AM: Mr. Suprynowicz, what is wrong with you? We must teach our children to be rounded up and taken to a day detention camp. We must obey the law(only 80,00 new laws were passed in 2003)! We must put our safety in the efficient hands of the police! Da!
Afew weeks ago there was a disturbance at my apartment complex involving some men who don't speak English, and it took only 8 hours for the police to respond! Sir, you must get a grip on reality! The government is here to help! Trust them! They know what they are doing! They have the borders of Iraq secured! Our forces are reducing the violence in a war zone by some percentage points! And you think we need less government!?

M. Ryan wrote on May 05, 2008 06:44 PM: "The United States has some 200 million handguns in circulation, and the highest handgun death rate (per 100,000 population) of any industrialized nation, with the possible exception of Brazil."

Yes, and Brazil has quite strict handgun laws. Those laws don't seem to work too well, do they?

"Japan has the fewest number of handguns in circulation and the lowest handgun death rate per 100,000."

Nice try, idiot, but Japanese-Americans here in the gun lovin' U.S. commit gun violence at an even lower rate than Japanese in Japan. So obviously Japan's low handgun homicide rate has nothing to do with Japanese gun laws.

Don't these fools ever get tired of regurgitating the same old propaganda? It's been refuted a million times, yet they just keep repeating it like a broken record.

Mike Glaser wrote on April 16, 2008 02:47 PM: There is a certain element of risk to living in a free society. I am more than happy to assume that risk in return for the fact that freedom defines the difference between living and merely existing. I'm certain that Japan has room for those who aren't willing to assume that risk.

Robert DiStefano wrote on April 14, 2008 09:11 PM: The right to own the means to protect your life pre-existed the USA, UN, Constitution, and Bill of Rights, it is called the right to survival! The Founding Fathers never insinuated that the right devolved from government, they didn't "confer" it, they merely "confirmed" it, and there is a difference! Since that right is God-given, rather than made by the legislature, our government, any government, has no right to meddle with it; and I acknowledge no right of my government, or any government (The UN) to claim domain over it! As I said, the right existed 100,000 years ago, when the Neanderthals dominated the earth, and it is inviolate! "Render to Caesar that which is Caesar's"; and my right to own a handgun is not the prerogative of "Caesar!"

Paolo wrote on April 14, 2008 06:17 PM: I think the usefulness of police forces is highly overrated. It is rare that policemen actually stop a crime in progress. Usually, the criminal plans the crime well enough to avoid them. They do serve a limited purpose in tracking down and capturing the perpetrator AFTER THE FACT, however.

Police spend an inordinate amount of time persecuting people involved in non-violent activities, like growing herbs (Indian Hemp being the most commonly grown). In these cases, it is the police doing the planning and staking out, rather than the criminal. In fact, one could argue the police, in this type of case, are in fact acting criminally.

I think a case can be made that we would be a whole lot better off if we cut the police forces by 90 percent, and encouraged citizens to defend their own lives and property.

Diane Toth wrote on April 14, 2008 03:31 PM: Vin once again is on target. Every creature given the breath of life deserves, no, OWNS the right to preserve that life. It's just that simple.

Mutineer wrote on April 14, 2008 02:28 PM: Good point Mark. Considering if you can indeed trust the police, and they are just merely minutes away.

In my experience, our city has neither.

It has been in the papers several times the police contempt towards the city in pay disputes, as evidenced by a week of "blue flu" epidemics, only to be alleviated by a judge's order that they be forced back to work. During that week, the city was left with virtually no police "protection" for other use of the word.

Perhaps anarchy did not result for two reasons; first the sick out was not well publicized but primarily criminals knew if they broke into a home while the owner is there, they risk staring down the business end of a firearm.

The police will always arrive after the event...like the good little paper pushers they are if even that. Anymore they want you to "come in", stand in line, and fill out forms. Their representative will contact you at a later time. They are an excellent reflection of the bureaucracy that we live in. It is further evident of their complete lack of feeling or even caring what goes on in the city. I'm not saying they are all that way, but a good majority are.

Rather than the crime and the forms...I'll continue to assert my right to self defense.

It is my observation that the right to self defense prohibited fascist groups such as the American Protective League in the Wilson years from being more effective. Fascists aren't going to intimidate those who are armed; they'll think twice when confronted with a barrel in the ribs...then go pick on easier prey.

Mark Ward wrote on April 14, 2008 10:43 AM: All readers should remember the following: If you are becoming a victim of a crime and seconds count, the police (if you can indeed trust them) are just minutes away.

Self defense is a human right.

Paolo wrote on April 13, 2008 01:20 PM: A commenter by the name of "duh" says: "so what do you do when someone kicks in your door at 4am...is it the police or a burglar?? do you shoot or say who is it???"

This actually brings up an interesting point. In a civilized society, the police would have to serve a warrant in a proper manner; that is, they would have to knock at the door and present the warrant naming the particular places to be searched and the items to be searched for.

Readers of Vin's columns down through the years have heard of example after example in which honest citizens were victims of these 4 AM raids. Look up "Donald Scott" if you want just one example.

In a free society, the 4 AM raid would be an extraordinary event. The only cause that would justify it would be the arrest of a violent criminal. If you wanted to serve a search warrant, however, there would be no need for such craven tactics. You would walk up to the door, knock, and present the search warrant.

What gives police the excuse for such raids today? Mainly, it is the insane "War on Drugs."

Mike wrote on April 13, 2008 12:57 PM: Vin, great column...as usual! When are you going to BRING IT HOME?? When are you going to look at the illegal, archaic, and arbitrary firearms ordinances here in Clark County??

It's time that you're readers hear from you about how our Second Amendment rights are restricted right here at home!!

Read All Comments