The Mainstream Media
By Ben Shapiro
At 2 a.m. on Sunday, 27-year-old Alan Senitt was murdered. Senitt, an aspiring British politician, Jewish activist and Democratic volunteer, was walking home a female companion in the Georgetown area of Washington, D.C. when he was accosted by Christopher Piper, 25, Jeffrey Rice, 22, and a 15-year-old. Piper, who had a gun, immediately grabbed Senitt's female companion and pulled her away to rape her. Rice, who had stated earlier in the night that he was desperate to "cut" someone, slit Senitt's throat. The three thugs then hopped into a getaway car driven by Olivia Miles, 26, and sped off into the night.
Only hours later, the police arrested the four suspects. Apparently, two of the suspects matched the descriptions of perpetrators of two recent robberies, and the police had already obtained an address for those two suspects. So why did Alan Senitt have to die in order for these animals to be arrested? "I can give you my 100 percent word everything was done within the confines of the law," Lt. Robert Glover of the police department's violent crimes branch told the Washington Post. "We cannot make an arrest without probable cause."
Now the police have their probable cause. Rice was found with Senitt's ID and the woman's cell phone on his person, and his shirt covered in Senitt's blood. The suspects are in custody. And Alan Senitt is dead.
Our Constitution mandates that citizens may not be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. One of the requirements of due process of law is that arrests not be arbitrary. It is likely true that the D.C. police did everything within the confines of the law to pursue the suspects. What the murder of Alan Senitt demonstrates is that the confines of law cost lives when citizens are unable to protect themselves.
Law enforcement is by its very nature reactive. The police cannot arrest people before they have committed any crimes, a la "Minority Report." Citizens should not expect that the police will be able to prevent all crime -- there must always be an initial crime in order for police to prevent subsequent crimes. Until Ted Bundy murdered his first victim, the police had nothing for which to arrest him; at the very most, law enforcement could only have saved Bundy's later victims. Someone always has to suffer before law enforcement can get involved.
Citizens are left with two choices. They can either rely on the kindness of criminals, or they can protect themselves. The choice is obvious. Yet liberal cities continue to rely on the kindness of criminals.
Washington, D.C. is famous for its insanely restrictive anti-gun laws. It has been illegal since 1976 to have an assembled and loaded firearm, even in your home, in D.C. Carrying a handgun for self-protection is against the law. For some reason, Democrats seem to be unable to explain the dramatic 72 percent rise in the D.C. homicide rate between 1976 and 2001, even as the national homicide rate plummeted 36 percent over the same period. Certainly Christopher Piper had no problem carrying a gun and using it to rape Senitt's female companion. Criminals, it seems, engage in crime. And law-abiding citizens pay the price.
The basis for every right in our Constitution is the right to self-preservation. John Locke, the founders' favorite non-Biblical philosopher, explained that if a government " endeavour[s] to grasp themselves an absolute power over the lives, liberties, and estates of the people; by this breach of trust they forfeit the power the people had put into their hands for quite contrary ends, and it devolves to the people, who have a right to resume their original liberty."
When a government seizes citizens' ability to protect themselves, that government becomes a usurper. It is for this reason that the Second Amendment guarantees both the individual right to self-defense and the communal right to fight any deprivation of the right to self-defense.
Would Alan Senitt have bought a gun for self-defense? The question is irrelevant in D.C.; Senitt had no choice in the matter. As it stands in D.C., only criminals have the right to choose. And the police can only respond to 911 calls.
 |
| Christiaan Briggs |
Now dude must know what it is like to be a victim of the drug wars, but of course he won’t go to jail like a middle class or poor person would. I like Rush but this shows us all what is up and how unequally people are treated.
Roy Black, Rush Limbaugh's attorney, issued the following statement today in response to several inquiries by the media:
While going through routine Customs inspection of luggage at Palm Beach International Airport upon his return from an international trip, Rush Limbaugh was detained by customs agents after they noticed a non-narcotic prescription drug, which had been prescribed by Mr. Limbaugh's treating physician but labeled as being issued to the physician rather than Mr. Limbaugh for privacy purposes. After a brief interview, Mr. Limbaugh was permitted to continue on his journey.
I'm pretty sure it doesn’t make any difference to you malcontents out there but there are WMD's in Iraq. How foolish of you to not think so. Why do you think Sadam would jeopardize his position the way he did if he did not already have or had plans on developing more WMD weapons?
I know right now you are saying that it is not true and when you finally have to admit it you will say that is hardly a stockpile but what you don’t want to know is that it only took three of those Sarin Artillery shells to kill the Kruds in the eighties. Sarain and Mustard gas are lethal and Sarin was used in the Tokyo subway to a grim effect.
I can’t wait to hear your feeble excuses and rants. This will only show the nastiness and political expedience of your vote for the war in the first place. Oh you were for it when 9/11 happened, but as soon as the going got tough you wanted and still want to withdraw and call the whole thing off right away. Why would any American President ever want to defend us or our allies? As soon as you lunatic suicidal American hating base started to raise hell you were ready to back out with all expediency. If Bill Clinton or John Kerry were in office we would have left years ago and the beheaders would rein over the whole Mideast. As a matter of fact Bin Laden himself has said that our withdrawal from Lebanon and Somalia are the reasons that he felt emboldened to attack us on 9/11.
But even if we were to ignore those signs and truly believe there was no connection between Saddam Hussein and the jihadist movement, there is no sane reasoning that could possibly conclude today’s Iraq is not part of the GWOT. One dead Jordanian might say otherwise, and he has countless times as has a cave-hopping Saudi. Read this and weep you pantywaisters.
Why is it that these people are always leaking important stuff to the press? When will they be prosecuted?
Isn't this worse than what Karl rove was accused of?
WASHINGTON - The United States has moved its ground-based interceptor missile defense system from test mode to operational amid concerns over an expected North Korean missile launch, a U.S. defense official said on Tuesday.
The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed a Washington Times report that the Pentagon has activated the system, which has been in the developmental stage for years.
"It's good to be ready," the official said.
U.S. officials say evidence such as satellite pictures suggests Pyongyang may have finished fueling a Taepodong-2 missile, which some experts said could reach as far as Alaska.
"There's real caution in how to characterize it so as to not be provocative in our own approach," the defense official said of the move to activate the system.
The Pentagon and State Department have said a North Korean missile launch would be seen as "provocative."
While military officials also note the United States has a limited missile defense system, they have so far declined to comment on any details about the capabilities or potential use of the system to intercept a North Korean missile.
More Articles...
Page 5 of 8
