Grandpappy told my pappy, back in my day, son
A man had to answer for the wicked that he done
Take all the rope in Texas
Find a tall oak tree, round up all of them bad boys
Hang them high in the street, for all the people to see
A man had to answer for the wicked that he done
Take all the rope in Texas
Find a tall oak tree, round up all of them bad boys
Hang them high in the street, for all the people to see
--"Whiskey for My Men, Beer for My Horses," Toby Keith
The King County Council is not going to place a sales tax option on the fall ballot to raise money for a financially-strapped public safety budget this fall, but instead may resort to seeking a property tax hike.
Sheriff Sue Rahr, who has always struck this column as “one of the good guys,” explains in an Op-Ed piece in this morning’s Seattle Times that “without additional funding” her department will be forced to cut 70 deputies. There will be 36 fewer deputy prosecutors to work criminal cases. That is this year, according to Rahr and Prosecutor Dan Satterberg. Next year will be worse.
Meanwhile, Times columnist Nicole Brodeur laments this morning about a park levy that won’t be spent because of budget woes and a goofy law that does not allow the levy funds to be tapped because there are not ample general funds for current parks operation, apparently due to budget priorities. What’s more important, Nicole, parks or public safety?
Without additional funding, we will be forced to cut vital public safety personnel — an additional 70 deputy sheriffs, 36 deputy prosecutors, the entire probation department that watches over DUI and domestic violence offenders, and other essential court and jail programs. That is just for 2011; the cuts to follow in 2012 will be even greater.- King County Sheriff Sue Rahr, Prosecutor Dan Satterberg
How we got into this mess is open to debate. KVI’s John Carlson has been blaming labor unions and their power, and the cowardice of the county council Democrats to confront that power with a dose of reality. Reader feedback in the Seattle Times suggests that liberal spending policies are to blame.
But we are in a mess, along with the rest of the country. What we can anticipate, according to Rahr, is longer response time, perhaps no response at all to certain crimes. This column discussed the problem here, and since then things have only gotten worse. Down in Sacramento County, CA where there is a lively race for sheriff in the works, citizens are looking at looming budget cuts and they want to arm themselves.
But with law enforcement facing budget cuts, voters are increasingly asking for the right to carry concealed weapons for self-protection, and the candidates for sheriff are hearing them.-Sacramento Bee
In the midst of this is the case in Issaquah, in which two men have been arrested for beating a rape suspect. The apparent rape victim is the wife of one of the arrested men, and public outrage on two local talk stations – KIRO-FM and KVI – was voiced all day long on Monday.
This column has frequently referred to Washington state’s superb self-defense statute and the use of lethal force, which is essentially based on the age-old “reasonable man doctrine.” That is, a person may use force, even lethal force, if it is reasonable to conclude that such force is necessary to stop or prevent a crime in which there is imminent and unavoidable threat of grave bodily harm or death; what any reasonable person would do if faced with the same set of circumstances, knowing what you knew at the time. It does not constitute an open season on bad guys.
The on-line Seattle Post-Intelligencer headlined reporter Scott Sunde’s story about the Issaquah incident as though it were a case of vigilante justice. You be the judge, and before you do that, take a careful read of RCW 9A.16.020, this state’s “Use of Force” statute, and explain below what you think it means, and allows.
After cutting $150 million over the past two years, the county is expected to see deficits of $60 million and $80 million over the next two years. Since criminal justice agencies eat up about 70 percent of the $630 million general fund, they faced the brunt of the cuts.
In the last installment, this column reported that violent crime is down while private gun ownership is up. Typically in a lousy economy, crime rates go up, but that pattern was established in an era when gun ownership was not in a resurgence as it is now, and there weren’t an estimated 6 million private citizens licensed to carry defensive firearms. Some people insist there is no direct correlation, others disagree, and others maintain it proves more guns do not mean more crime, as anti-gunners have long insisted.
A bankrupt example of liberal pie-in-the-sky policies enacted by people with no consideration of fiscal responsibility.”—‘Blue Light’ Seattle Times reader feedback
We may be entering a new era that resurrects old values, something a fair number of modern urbanites seem all too incapable of handling because they have gotten used to caretaker government and gotten out of the habit of taking care of themselves. Hardly is it time to haul out ropes and find stout tree limbs, but from all indications, in the very near future, a lot of people are going to be making some hard decisions about their own safety and the safety of their families, their home security and the difference between dependence on government and self-reliance.
Will that process include buying a gun? If recent trends tell us anything, the answer to that one is “Yes.”
For more info: Washington State Gun Rights and Responsibilities. America Fights Back: Armed Self-Defense in a Violent Age.
SHARE THIS COLUMN if you think it is worthwhile reading. Forward the link to other forums and chat lists.
More from Gun Rights Examiners
Atlanta: Ed Stone | Austin: Howard Nemerov | Boston: Ron Bokleman | Charlotte: Paul Valone | Cheyenne: Anthony Bouchard | Chicago: Don Gwinn | Cleveland: Daniel White | DC: Mike Stollenwerk | Denver: Dan Bidstrup | Detroit: Rob Reed | Fort Smith: Steve D. Jones | Knoxville: Liston Matthews | Los Angeles: John Longenecker | Minneapolis: John Pierce | National: David Codrea | Seattle: Dave Workman | St. Louis: Kurt Hofmann | Tucson: Chris Woodard
And Don’t forget to visit:
Comments
I would gladly pay more taxes to have more police on the streets. Like I'd gladly pay more taxes to have potholes fixed. There's lots of things I'd pay taxes for.
What I would do if crime rates go up because of fewer police is to stay home more. I have already made similar changes due to lack of money in my own life. I don't take vacations anymore as I can't afford it. I don't go out to restaurants. I even ride the bus less; if it's too far to walk, I don't go. Frankly, I don't even go out that much anyway after sunset because Seattle isn't that safe. I guess the only other thing would be a home invasion. I'd prob get beat up because I don't have much worth stealing (a TV from the mid-80s!). So I'd get assault as the perps would be mad there wasn't anything good here, and they'd prob break up the rest of my stuff. Well, at least that'd be one way to get rid of it...
Hey Dave,
Sadly, WA state residents are going to have to re-think that 'wonderful' self defense law you like so much: when the massive amounts of layoffs continue, people are going to be faced with 'being safe rather than sorry'.
This will inevitably lead to more shootings which do not so readily fall into the 'reasonable' category, which category has been abused with far to great a frequency by politically ambitious liberal/SP prosecutors.
Raising taxes, property or otherwise, is a splendid idea, right up to the point that you realize that property owners CAN'T pay anymore in taxes, because like everyone else, they're tapped.
Insurance costs on the house, the vehicles, personal property, indemnity, license fees for the rigs, upkeep on the house, maintenance on the rigs, utilities, GAS, food and clothing costs, and on and on and on.
The bottom line is that the tax gravy train is over: gone, done with, extinct.
More in next
Simply put, the outlay of the average property owner is staggering, from both an 'overhead' aspect and a personal aspect (credit card debt alone is staggering and the SP-Dems in Congress just shot down another piece of legislation to LIMIT the interest rates Banks/Card companies can charge).
So what are the professional politicians and theorists (Social Progressives) going to do?
Dave, we're in the 'blood from turnips' phase of personal economics and sadly, those who have spent our money like water as a way of life, can't think outside the box.
This means that police/sheriff's services, along with the fire departments and EMT's, are going to be cut down to the proverbial bone.
Anarchy is coming I'm sorry to say, because unlike my grandfolks (who raised me in Edmonds) who came of age during the Great Depression, most people today are NOT 'self reliant'.
They simply don't know how to be.
The result? More shootings under less 'reasonable' circumstances.
Okay I'll guess with you. Why would Washingtonians have to "re-think" the existing self-defense statute?
It's a good one. It's textbook reasonable man doctrine.
What do you want, open season? Is that what you are suggesting?
The economy and unemployment have NOTHING to do with justifiable homicide as spelled out and defined by statute. Just because more people may be out of work is not going to justify offing somebody. The standard of threat must still be met.
Reminds me of how my relatively prosperous home town passes school levies: mention cutting after school sports and other programs. I understand there comes a time when priorities get harder to follow. Given a choice between the mayors annual office flower budget and parks I would want to save parks. But this one isn't -that- much harder. Public safety is the obvious highest priority, let's be adults and get on with it.
Easy- get educated, understand their local SD related laws...and PRACTICE!
Great article sir!
Past attitude was more crime = more police = more property taxes/sales taxes and the upward spiral starts. Now people are maxed out on property taxes/sales taxes and cops are too expensive to have anymore and nothing is done about rising crime except people are taking their own protection into their hands by buying guns.They are not taking it anymore. I am from Sacramento County and none of sheriff's candidates endorsed "shall issue" for concealed weapons until the public outcry. They were against it and against issuing any more concealed weapons permits foir any reason. look at their early statements. They have done a 180 turnabout so how can they be trusted? I am not a Brett Daniels suporter but he may have been the only one to start out supporting the "shall issue" concept. How many supervisors have promised not more "pet" projects? Your only recourse is throw anyone currently in office out and start over. Otherwise the old will infect the new. No more party politics.
Robert-Sacramento, run! You are too intelligent to survive in California. You are seriously outnumbered by people who have no concept of the value of life or liberty.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!