By Mabel Doge Luhan
Isn’t technology wonderful? Orville just gave me his old T-Mobile Sidekick, apparently because it lacks a kitchen appliance! What will they think of next? He’s just grateful that his new phone runs two grinders at once! Orville sure loves coffee!
As for me, I’ve finally been able to check my score on Hot Or Not, update my Myspace playlist, then view some articles on The Facebook! Oh, what a wonderful place The Facebook is! I am especially glad to see the popularity of 19th century medical knowledge that I had worried was long extinct!
In any case, on Kandit Camera’s Facebook information superhighway, I saw an interesting discussion in regards to an apparent home intrusion experienced by a reader of Kandit. On the day of celebrating love and mercy and shopping, quite an online crowd formed to cheer for gunning down anyone who dares enter their property!
Specifically, those Kandit readers advocate for a “castle law” in the CNMI — a law that removes any criminal or civil liability for anyone killing someone in their home who’s unwanted. Well! My ex-husbands should be quite glad there was no castle law in New Mexico, and that I prohibit my batman from carrying firearms ever since the incident with the peacock.
But those Christ-loving Kandit readers gleefully discuss “blowing away lowlifes” who might wander into our homes, and they seem quite certain that instituting such a law would do away with crime.
I am no criminal — aside from narcotics trafficking, tax evasion, and odometer tampering — but I find it difficult to believe that the average desperate Saipan methamphetamine addict looking for something to steal would be deterred by such a law. In fact, I would guess that such an addict, knowing about such a law, might be more likely to bring his own firepower, and shoot the homeowner before the homeowner can (legally) shoot him.
Well, if I were Bryan Manabat, I’d see what the scholars of Facebook have to say on the issue. If I were a Marianas Variety commenter, I’d check the authorities on Bitchute or Stormfront. But I’m a bit old-fashioned, so I prefer to get my information from the rabidly pro-gun crazy-libertarian Rand Corporation, which has never seen a gun they didn’t love. Certainly they must have something in support of castle laws or stand-your-ground laws:
But wait, what’s this?
https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/stand-your-ground/violent-crime.html
“Evidence that stand-your-ground laws may increase total homicide rates is moderate, and evidence that such laws may increase firearm homicide rates is supportive. Evidence that stand-your ground laws may increase overall violent crime rates is limited.”
Seriously, Rand Corporation? What’s become of your gun-loving ways? Maybe we should consult a more reliably pro-gun source: Texas A&M University. And not any bleeding-heart sociologists, but the economics department, publishing in the Journal of Human Resources:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/23799103
Pre-publication full text: https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w18134/w18134.pdf
“Results indicate the laws do not deter burglary, robbery, or aggravated assault. In contrast, they lead to a statistically significant 8 percent net increase in the number of reported murders and nonnegligent manslaughters.”
That’s from Cheng and Hoekstra, “Does Strengthening Self-Defense Law Deter Crime or Escalate Violence? Evidence from Expansions to Castle Doctrine” in The Journal of Human Resources Vol. 48, No. 3 (Summer 2013).
What the hell, guys? Even Texas A&M? If the Rand Corporation and Texas A&M don’t support blasting your neighbor’s teenage kids with lead because they knocked on the wrong door, what has the world come to?
Because, yes, those Facebook law-and-order types of course want the “Castle Doctrine” to include the entryway and front yard and so on.
And of course they imagine those on the receiving end of that sprayed lead being “lowlife scum.” Not their neighbor, or their neighbor’s kids or guests, or even just some poor hapless addict in the throes of unbearable meth withdrawal symptoms.
Not only are such laws useless for deterring crime, but they’re worse than useless. They increase crime.
Of course, one wonders whether deterring crime is really the laws’ purpose There is certainly at least some contingent of Jesus-loving folk who love the idea of blasting away their neighbors with legal immunity. And despite Christianity’s formal rejection of retributive justice, well, who doesn’t love the idea of violently “taking down” someone who’s about to steal their new TV?
There’s a rampant sickness that sends people to attempt to rob their neighbors. But maybe there’s also a sickness among those who are so obsessed with gunning them down.
_____
Mabel Doge Luhan is a woman of loose morals. She resides in Kagman V, where she pursues her passions of crocheting, beatboxing, and falconry.
1 Comments
Andy
12/27/2023 at 7:23 AM
Mabel,
Again, wordy and tough to digest…but that’s your shtick (I should have written Sideshtick to make you laugh), but alas back to the topic.
Of course, more castle doctrine laws lead to more causalities of the index crime against the “Castle.” That the nature of the beast…some Saki-shite wanders into the neighbor’s family room and wham-o…holes and red flowing stuff follow.
The thing you’re missing is that Castle doctrine empowers the victims with an aim to protect the innocent from the barbarians at the gate. You advocate for turning the other cheek to these assailants. Have you ever been robbed? Has your home been invaded? Have you ever had your possessions taken under threat of violence? Have you suffered a violent sexual assault? I suspect I know the answers to these questions, because if you had suffered any of the above, you would understand the value of protection. You would support the ability to defend yourself and your family even if it leads to more homicides and manslaughter cases…when in fact it’s more akin to self-defense because in our postmodern world, it only matters what I think a thing means…not what you tell me you think it means. Stop giving cover to bad actors. Start supporting and empowering the weak and vulnerable in your community. And stop being so wordy in 2024, please.