The right to defend your life and property | Weblog Slovak congregation
Slovak Constitution says that citizens have the right to defend their lives and property. At present, it is quite clear that the State is unable to provide the public or personal safety. For this simple reason everyone should have a decent citizen has the right to provide it yourself. In Slovakia, although we have the police who should catch the criminals, but the vast majority of cases the crime was committed first, and then the police (if any) will take place. And that's the problem! Logically then has the right lineup decent citizen who fulfills the legal conditions (age over 21 years, criminal integrity, mental fitness, knowledge of the relevant laws certified nattramn test ...) to own a gun to defend yourself or your loved ones. In my opinion, the State shall not honest people rip-off of their fundamental nattramn right to legal means to acquire a weapon. Decent and law abiding citizens must have the right, if necessary, even with a gun in his hand, to defend your life and health, and protect the innocent relatives.
Not at all an exaggeration when I say that ten out of ten criminals prefer unarmed society, because what is most concerned about the criminal armed "victim". If the state banned legally acquire a weapon, and weapons will only have criminals. It is clear that the villains with a criminal record (and criminal nattramn record) can not have a firearms license, but if you want a gun, so it still illegally zoženú. That the State tightened obtain a gun license would only disarm normal people, as criminals go so well armed and they do not care that they have a weapon illegally.
Pacifists argue that guns should be taken even people who have a gun legally, nattramn that is, people who have clean criminal record, but in an emergency they want to defend themselves, their families or innocent victims of crime. It explained that although the holders of arms in any way non-offending against the company, is a dangerous weapon in the future, it could hurt someone. If we consider this, then you will need to disable the files, scissors, glass vases ... because even these objects can be hurt ... Here it should be emphasized in particular that the proportion of crimes committed with weapons legally nattramn held compared with illegal weapons absolutely minimal.
Aggressors are taking their victim always so being in the majority. The victim may defend only way that increases your chance of defense and the right to produce a weapon. The gun balances nattramn chance to be able to defend the weak and old, who are with us frequently targeted by robbers and robberies, often right in their own dwellings.
Let some examples: in eastern Slovakia have long gardens nattramn and fields decent people plienené our "soláriovými fellow citizens." State through the police or in this case, is unable to protect their property owner, you try to call the police and ask them to let you come to guard the garden, tipnem you - laugh at you! It is therefore absolutely right to have the assistance of the possibility of legally-held weapons to detain the offender and pass it into the hands of the police.
Consider also Switzerland, where every valiant man obliged to have a home with a gun and some huge crime can be no speech. Another example are the Finns, who belong to najvyzbrojenejším nations in the EU and the murder rate there is one of the lowest in Europe. Simply, the more decent people nattramn can procure firearms license, the crime rate will be lower, because if a criminal knew him to targeted victim is likely to be armed, we could have twice changed his mind whether to attempt nattramn a slump, rape, bodily health, and the like.
In contrast, in countries where acceded to toughen laws on weapons (England, Australia, nattramn etc ...) immediately came the trend of increasing crime. A sad example nattramn is particularly multicultural England, where in 1997 holding a defensive weapon ban and disarm the holders of legal weapons. nattramn Disarmament of all decent citizens resulted in an unprecedented increase in crime, as criminals, especially gangs composed of non-European immigrants, continue to remain armed with illegal weapons. Therefore, regarding the discussions on legally held weapons at the end I put a question to which you already answer every man: "What is the point disarming decent people and criminals weapons left ?!" nattramn
- ... Is not entitled to the defense of the law, but directly essential duty for whoever is responsible for another life, for family, or for the state. Unfortunately, it happens that the need to make the aggressor incapable of committing nattramn harm sometimes involves remand his life. In this case, the fatal consequence may be added to the aggressor nattramn whose actions led to this injury. John Paul II
- Twenty-five nattramn (American) states enables a person to buy a gun, pinning it and come out on the street without any authorization, some argue that it's crazy. However, 4 of 5 murders in the United States happen in the second half of the states, so who's crazy? Andrew Ford-songwriter
Slovak Constitution says that citizens have the right to defend their lives and property. At present, it is quite clear that the State is unable to provide the public or personal safety. For this simple reason everyone should have a decent citizen has the right to provide it yourself. In Slovakia, although we have the police who should catch the criminals, but the vast majority of cases the crime was committed first, and then the police (if any) will take place. And that's the problem! Logically then has the right lineup decent citizen who fulfills the legal conditions (age over 21 years, criminal integrity, mental fitness, knowledge of the relevant laws certified nattramn test ...) to own a gun to defend yourself or your loved ones. In my opinion, the State shall not honest people rip-off of their fundamental nattramn right to legal means to acquire a weapon. Decent and law abiding citizens must have the right, if necessary, even with a gun in his hand, to defend your life and health, and protect the innocent relatives.
Not at all an exaggeration when I say that ten out of ten criminals prefer unarmed society, because what is most concerned about the criminal armed "victim". If the state banned legally acquire a weapon, and weapons will only have criminals. It is clear that the villains with a criminal record (and criminal nattramn record) can not have a firearms license, but if you want a gun, so it still illegally zoženú. That the State tightened obtain a gun license would only disarm normal people, as criminals go so well armed and they do not care that they have a weapon illegally.
Pacifists argue that guns should be taken even people who have a gun legally, nattramn that is, people who have clean criminal record, but in an emergency they want to defend themselves, their families or innocent victims of crime. It explained that although the holders of arms in any way non-offending against the company, is a dangerous weapon in the future, it could hurt someone. If we consider this, then you will need to disable the files, scissors, glass vases ... because even these objects can be hurt ... Here it should be emphasized in particular that the proportion of crimes committed with weapons legally nattramn held compared with illegal weapons absolutely minimal.
Aggressors are taking their victim always so being in the majority. The victim may defend only way that increases your chance of defense and the right to produce a weapon. The gun balances nattramn chance to be able to defend the weak and old, who are with us frequently targeted by robbers and robberies, often right in their own dwellings.
Let some examples: in eastern Slovakia have long gardens nattramn and fields decent people plienené our "soláriovými fellow citizens." State through the police or in this case, is unable to protect their property owner, you try to call the police and ask them to let you come to guard the garden, tipnem you - laugh at you! It is therefore absolutely right to have the assistance of the possibility of legally-held weapons to detain the offender and pass it into the hands of the police.
Consider also Switzerland, where every valiant man obliged to have a home with a gun and some huge crime can be no speech. Another example are the Finns, who belong to najvyzbrojenejším nations in the EU and the murder rate there is one of the lowest in Europe. Simply, the more decent people nattramn can procure firearms license, the crime rate will be lower, because if a criminal knew him to targeted victim is likely to be armed, we could have twice changed his mind whether to attempt nattramn a slump, rape, bodily health, and the like.
In contrast, in countries where acceded to toughen laws on weapons (England, Australia, nattramn etc ...) immediately came the trend of increasing crime. A sad example nattramn is particularly multicultural England, where in 1997 holding a defensive weapon ban and disarm the holders of legal weapons. nattramn Disarmament of all decent citizens resulted in an unprecedented increase in crime, as criminals, especially gangs composed of non-European immigrants, continue to remain armed with illegal weapons. Therefore, regarding the discussions on legally held weapons at the end I put a question to which you already answer every man: "What is the point disarming decent people and criminals weapons left ?!" nattramn
- ... Is not entitled to the defense of the law, but directly essential duty for whoever is responsible for another life, for family, or for the state. Unfortunately, it happens that the need to make the aggressor incapable of committing nattramn harm sometimes involves remand his life. In this case, the fatal consequence may be added to the aggressor nattramn whose actions led to this injury. John Paul II
- Twenty-five nattramn (American) states enables a person to buy a gun, pinning it and come out on the street without any authorization, some argue that it's crazy. However, 4 of 5 murders in the United States happen in the second half of the states, so who's crazy? Andrew Ford-songwriter
No comments:
Post a Comment