Of course, a liberal argument for gun control is that the police will protect us. They argue this, despite the fact that courts have routinely said that the police have no duty to protect any individual.

Liberals who are afraid of freedom and afraid of personal responsibility will always sacrifice the individual to maintain state power. But hey, as Chairman Mao said, "You have to break a few eggs to make an omelette."

As always libeals say we dont need to use guns in self defense we can go call the police and as always these dumb liberal know-nothings have no answer when it takes the police a hour to get there proving liberals are idiots

Everyone should read Jeffrey Snyder's essay "A Nation of Cowards" (reprinted on the web at numerour sites):

Most people readily believe that the existence of the police relieves them of the responsibility to take full measures to protect themselves. The police, however, are not personal bodyguards. Rather, they act as a general deterrent to crime, both by their presence and by apprehending criminals after the fact. As numerous courts have held, they have no legal obligation to protect anyone in particular. You cannot sue them for failing to prevent you from being the victim of a crime.

Insofar as the police deter by their presence, they are very, very good. Criminals take great pains not to commit a crime in front of them. Unfortunately, the corollary is that you can pretty much bet your life (and you are) that they won't be there at the moment you actually need them.

Should you ever be the victim of an assault, a robbery, or a rape, you will find it very difficult to call the police while the act is in progress, even if you are carrying a portable cellular phone. Nevertheless, you might be interested to know how long it takes them to show up. Department of Justice statistics for 1991 show that, for all crimes of violence, only 28 percent of calls are responded to within five minutes. The idea that protection is a service people can call to have delivered and expect to receive in a timely fashion is often mocked by gun owners, who love to recite the challenge, "Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first."

I'm reminded of a case that appeared in a newspaper a couple of years ago. A young woman had called 911 because she was being stalked by a guy who refused to leave her alone. He had kicked down her door and beaten her father for getting in his way. When he kicked in her bedroom door she was talking to the 911 operator with the phone in one hand and a 9mm in the other. She is on tape warning him to get back. He indicated that he was convinced that she would never shoot him because she loved him.

He was wrong on both counts.

"When Seconds Count, The Police Are Only Minutes Away"

But the Killer is just a heartbeat away.

Gun control is the concept that it is better to have a woman strangled to death by her rapist with her underwear, then to allow her to defend her self with a gun.

"At this point we believe it was a burglary gone awry,"

Oh, like the burglar brought a gun because he *wasn't* planning on shooting anyone?

Even the dumbest criminal attempts to commit his crime as far from police presence as possible. Great headline JT

Gun control advocates have seen the tides shift away from them starting in 1994 after they soundly got their asses handed to them with the passage of the AWB.

With the recent shootings in locations that had "No guns allowed" prominently posted and the church shooting where Jeanne Assam stopped the criminal by shooting him the public has come to realize that one person with a gun can make a difference.