Technically ones use of the First Ammendment can be used to remove the Second. In MD.
Do you think my right to Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness excludes the right to self-terminate when I choose to? or do you know better than I do regarding continuation of my existence?
Technically ones use of the First Ammendment can be used to remove the Second. In MD.
Why is it the governments buisness if that guy wanted to kill himself?
The government doesn’t mind planned parenthood killing hundreds of thousands of babies so why would it involve itself in this guys buisness?
And once committed the taxpayers end up paying for this guy to be committed, hows that fair to the taxpayers and what is the governments stand on paying for this?
Well... since my intent in the matter... was NOT to serve the “government’s” interests... rather... it was to save lives. I wouldn’t know the answer to your question.
As a LEO...
It was not my job to act as an “agent of the government”. Rather it was my job to act as a liaison and walk the thin blue line between the government and the people and the criminals. Attempting to mitigate the friction between the first two sides and at the same time keep the criminals from taking advantage of either side. And at times... all three sides made the job difficult if not damn near impossible.
And since you asked...
I’ll expand on the thought and ask you... and no this is NOT directed in any personal manner. Nor is it intended to offend you or anyone else. It is simply a raw logic question.
What business is it of the government to have Police and Firemen respond to save ANY person’s life? If your house were burning and you along with your family were trapped inside... why should the government care enough to attempt to save you? They did not start the fire nor did they place you in the house. So why should they care.
Maybe... just maybe... because “the government” is “the people”... and not some foreign entity with no heart nor moral responsibility to other people. And the guy (and his SO) needed someone to step up for him and stop him from making a life ending mistake over a trivial matter.
Technically ones use of the First Ammendment can be used to remove the Second. In MD.
That’s comparing apple to oranges.
Someone killings themselves is a private matter unless they are taking a list of folks with them, so the government should have no more say in it than they do , for say an abortion, and they should leave it be. It’s a personal matter. Now I am pro life but I won’t stick my nose in someone else’s buisness. If they want to kill babies or themselves then that’s on them, it’s not really for the government to decide.
As for the fire department or the police, if I had my Choice there would be far fewer of each so taxes would be lower. The last time we had a house fire on the farm it took 45 minutes for the fire department to get there and put the embers that were left smoldering on the ground out. Rural folks know that the police, fire department and an ambulance are not going to get there in time so you have to do your best to take care of yourselves.
As for the government being the people, we live in md do we know that’s not so.
I get it... I’m the bad guy for saving a mans life while I was on duty. Thanks for clearing that up.
Maybe I should have been kicking in doors and shooting pet dogs while planting drugs on drug dealers and brutalizing innocent drunken wife beaters.
We never learn.
In the right (or wrong) hands, benevolent plans can easily be put to malevolent purposes.
Even the most well-intentioned government law or program can be—and has been—perverted, corrupted and used to advance illegitimate purposes once profit and power are added to the equation.
The war on terror, the war on drugs, the war on illegal immigration, asset forfeiture schemes, road safety schemes, school safety schemes, eminent domain: all of these programs started out as legitimate responses to pressing concerns and have since become weapons of compliance and control in the police state’s hands.
Mark my words: red flag gun laws, which allow the police to remove guns from people suspected of being threats, will only add to the government’s power.
We need to stop dangerous people before they act”: that’s the rationale behind the NRA’s support of these red flag laws, and at first glance, it appears to be perfectly reasonable to want to disarm individuals who are clearly suicidal and/or pose an “immediate danger” to themselves or others.
Where the problem arises, of course, is when you put the power to determine who is a potential danger in the hands of government agencies, the courts and the police.
We’ve been down this road before.
Remember, this is the same government that uses the words “anti-government,” “extremist” and “terrorist” interchangeably.
I don’t know you so I can’t say if your a good guy or bad, you seem ok to me but I absolutely believe a man has freedom in America to do pretty much what he wants to do as long as it’s not physically hurting anyone else so that if that guy wanted to off himself and he wasn’t taking anyone else with him then that was his buisness, whether you were on duty or not.
Theses just way to much government in America now. We are losing our freedom at an alarming rate, especially in Maryland and now with the 1302’s gun confiscation and people control law it’s far worse. And when hogan strengthens it this session or next to allow any interested persons to 1302 gun owners it’s gonna be infinitely worse.
Red Flag Gun Laws: Yet Another Government Weapon For Compliance And Control
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-11-14/red-flag-gun-laws-yet-another-government-weapon-compliance-and-control
A very long but very good read.