In New York city yesterday, a 57 year old disabled grandmother confined to her WHEELCHAIR shot her would-be mugger in the elbow with her registered .357 magnum. That kicks ass in so many ways.
Here in Canada where you are not allowed to fight back against your assailants, the mugger would probably be protected by more laws than the muggee. He'd probably get put in jail (if the police could be bothered to try and find him), but money would be lavishly spent on his 'rehabilitation', and he'd be released early. Then he'd probably sue her, but she'd probably already be in jail for attempted murder with an illegally concealed weapon.
Oh yeah, and there would be people trying to understand the 'root causes' of the crime, which would undoubtedly be the oppression of the working class and the poor by the heartless rich people. The mugger would be a victim of the bourgeousie, and his only fault would be acting out his frustrations.
I say forget root causes, I'm glad he got his, it's only too bad she couldn't have put that bullet in a different spot.
My favourite line from grandma: "I feel bad, but it was his choice."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Understanding root causes for crime is'nt meant to excuse them. It's meant to understand with an open mind what leads people to commit crimes. If it's been suggested over and over again that oppression to poor people leads them to crime, why would'nt we look at what we do personnally that could affect them and make an effort in that sense. For example, if you would be empathic enough not to state non constructive, limitative and "unquantifiable" notions such as "most people who steal are poor", you would have a positive impact against verbal oppression (stereotyping).
When I worked in elementary schools, some teachers were very clever to emphasize to the kids who got in trouble the distinction between being a bad person and doing something bad. There are no bad people, there are only bad decisions.
The grandma was right; it was his choice. He was'nt a mugger or a poor. She knew that he was just a man who made a bad choice. She also had a choice of how to handle that situation and she did what she thought was right to her then in the limits of her country's legislation. A very similar case happened in Winnipeg last year; an old woman beat a man with a baseball bat who came to her door to try to rob her and she received applaud from the medias, not legal repercussions. The law is'nt perfect, it's human made. So is society and to try and make it a more respectful place is our responsability.
In Canada the majority agrees that guns are not a way to make it a more respectful country; Do you try to understand why they think differently than you on that? Or do you see it as a reason to challenge their opinion with cases that might show that yours is the right one?
I am really curious to know if you enrich your understanding of the world through listening to other's?
Or does it make you defensive and mad when you hear or read another opinion because you find yours threatened and you try to express it harder?
Why do you think I encourage your comments?
Additionally, isn't saying "there are no bad people" really an excuse for bad people?
*em*, your argument is flawed on one wrong assesment. You said "The law is'nt perfect, it's human made. So is society and to try and make it a more respectful place is our responsability."
It's not our responsability to make it more respectful, it's our responsability to make it safer. The laws we have are a reflection of the society we have built for ourselves - and what we want our society to be in the future. When somebody breaks the law, it is a societies responsibility to make it clear that such acts are not acceptable, and there must be a deterant. Respectful is irrelevant,
It's extremely sad to see proof that the world we live in is shared with people without a sense of their own responsability to respect.
I do agree that people should choose to be respectful to others. Surely you must agree, that the ladies right to personal security trumps the robbers "right" to be respected (I don't think they've added that one to the Charter, yet).
I won't even make mention of which act was more disrepsectful, violently robbing a disabled lady - or violently acting in self-defense.
Post a Comment