On Dec 10, 9:24 am, "*" wrote:
wrote in article
...







Dont you wonder, in your more lucid moments, late at night (if you
have them) thats there is something fundamentally wrong with a society
where the populace need to be armed to cope with the nuttier
members........

I know its historical for you people, wild west, Hollywood, etc
etc..something in your constitution, but don't you wonder WHY shopping
centre massacres are a almost weekly occurrence....

How do you cope with this, the paranoia of buying a bottle of milk? -
there MUST be some alternative besides being armed to the teeth...

A while back, the liberals insisted on the rights of the mentally
challenged - who were being housed as much for their own protection as that
of innocent civilians - to be mainstreamed into society....

....and they were all released from a protective custody that was, in
actuality, a two-way street that protected the mentally-incapacitated from
themselves, and the innocent from the mentall-incapacitated/dangerous.

Of course, the liberals are NOW whining about the plight of these
"....poor, often mentally-challenged, street people....." - a class which
they, themselves, created.

One - not necessarily the entire - answer would be to again house some of
these people who are now roaming the streets - threatening innocent people,
shoplifting and stealing to survive, commiting crime, etc.

Everybody would be better protected by such a move.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You've hit one of the nails directly on the head. although it was
under Regan or Nixon (no veto) that California did this.

dennis
in nca