The most dangerous thing about these people is that they want to affect our minds. They want to convince us that we do not matter. That we have no value. That if we were truly decent and caring people we would care more about the man trying to shove parts of his body into you or me by force than our right not to have that happen.
September 19th, 2012
[I find it interesting that our opponents arguments are exactly as A Girl points out more and more. There is little to question about the way our opponents view criminals and the law-abiding. Their views are that the life of the criminal is worth more than the person who is being violated.
How sad is it when their position in the argument is that you should let the criminal violate you and then the state will give him “due process”. I don’t think he really understands how the legal system works. Due process isn’t a method to argue against self-defense. Due process is a legal term to protect the innocent from the force of the state. Due process only applies within the realm of the state. A criminal does not get entitled to have a jury vote thumbs up or down before their victim can fight back. The victim is a one man jury and the state will apply due process on that one man jury.
What does this mean for criminals? It means that if a criminal tries to kill someone, the victim can try to kill them right back. In the eyes of the law and due process, the victim will be justified in their actions while the criminal will not.
Never mind that the particular individual who brought about this argument failed reading comprehension 101. As I told A Girl yesterday regarding his commentary on “due process”:
WTFO? I think I just killed brain cells trying to make that supposedly logical leap…
It is unbelievable how willfully our opponents voice their distaste for the law-abiding while embracing, defending, and supporting criminals. -B]