Even a broken clock is right twice per day . . . why are her opponents not using the same argument to attack the gun control agenda of the left?
Laws exist to punish those who violate the rights of others, not stop them from violating the rights of others. Law enforcement can't prevent crimes from happening, only respond to the violations of the law after they occur.
When seconds count, police are only minutes away . . . which means that they can't stop what's about to happen. Isn't this what we've been saying all along? Now sure, a visible deterrent might delay the commission of a crime, perhaps prevent one individual from being robbed, but as soon as the deterrent walks away, another potential victim enters the vacated space.
Our own SCOTUS has proclaimed that law enforcement has no duty to protect because that's simply a function that it is unable to supply. In DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services the Rehnquist court reasoned that the Due Process Clause is a limitation on government's ability to act, not a promise of safety from private violence; to protect The People from the state, not protect them from each other. It is an expression of the "negative" rights lamented by Obama.
Why not use Crockett's words to show that the Democrat arguments are, and have been, hollow shells which provide no security, no safety, and that even Democrats, when they say the silent part out loud, admit that they know the truth?
