19 August 2012

The Only Thing

that bugs the hell out of me in this story is this statement:

"Police said Lewis will not be charged for shooting the suspect."

Drives me nuts every time I see this, as if there is a question that someone should be charged for defending their own, or their loved ones, life, liberty or property against loss by force or fraud. After all, “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.”
Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

I could throw in the usual pontification about how the gun grabbers would rather that Ms Lewis and her daughters occupy the moral high ground...likely along with the physical underground...by not defending themselves and being victims instead, or point out that the gun puts a 100lb woman on equal footing with a 250lb assailant, but the choir has already heard this sermon and the grabbers aren't listening anyway.

Well done, Ms Lewis. Teach those girls how to shoot as well.

Hat tips go to Sean and Emperor Misha. Kind of surprised that Jay G doesn't have it, but I guess it wouldn't go on the DGC because the G is not, in fact, D.


Sean D Sorrentino said...

For once I'd like to see

"When asked, Sheriff Smith said 'Of course she's not going to face charges. What would we charge her with? Defending your life is not a crime. Defending you children is not a crime. Shooting home invaders is not a crime. What would we charge her with? Being awesome?'"

Thanks for the link.

Robert Fowler said...

At least they didn't call the suspect a "victim".

Larry said...

I saw it once.


I sure would like to see it more.

Thanks for dropping by Sean!

Larry said...

That's true Robert. And since he's not pushing daisies he won't end up on the gun death stats either, so there's that, too.
Thanks for dropping by!