That is so true.

Protection is my responsibility. Upholding the law to try to ensure that I don't have to is the governments.

Failure of the government to protect it's citizens. Example: some criminal tags (puts graffiti) on my fence. I am charged if I don't remove it in a specified time. Criminal caught: 20 hours community service. Total cost to properly deal with graffiti is much more than that in time and money.
The question is: what to do to truly decrease crime.

He is a good speaker. Some really neat correlations between us and the animal kingdom. Sorry I could not find the link I was referring to.
Take care.

In the land where we are all supposed to be equal, why is there greater outrage, and penalties for crimes against police? More vigorous investigations and prosecutions? Why must I pull into the next lane when police are on the shoulder, but not for my fellow citizen traveler? Higher fines for injuring road workers? Why do we hear about every Kardashian's broken nail, while untold multitudes of average Joes build the world in obscurity? Who is John Galt?
AJAshinioff is right. It's not!

Thanks for the link and for the de Waal name. His Wikipedia article includes a wonderful (and even somewhat relevant) quote:
"The possibility that empathy resides in parts of the brain so ancient that we share them with rats should give pause to anyone comparing politicians with those poor, underestimated creatures."
—Frans de Waal

It was quite a while ago and I tried to find the same article. It might not have been Dawkins but Frans de Waal. Here is a link that alludes to the idea. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0ZsO...

Most crime involves criminals attacking other criminals because they tend to know criminals and as criminals they cannot have the authorities resolve their disputes. To avoid ruminating about a random peril, people imagine crime almost never happens to law-abiding citizens carrying nothing of significant value. When they hear it's a congressman's grandson, they imagine (whether facts support it or not) that he's likely not involved in violent crime.

When something affects our life in a big way, we like to think there is a big cause. We shudder to think a random mutation of DNA or deranged criminal could kill us. We imagine the other 600 murders were drug deals shooting one another or maybe people carrying large cash drops to the bank, not people who we might identify with being murder for random reasons.

Why indeed?

Do you have a link for the Dawkins info? Thanks.

Lol. Thanks. +1

I didn't know that. Amazing how that works.

It is some form of madness.
I guess the promises of Socialism are so strong that they even overwhelm the reality. The only thing I've come to compare it to is losing in Las Vegas. The loser knows that the odds are against him and if he keeps on playing he will only keep on losing. He knows that someone has won at sometime, why shouldn't be him? As children, do they still teach the hare and the tortoise or the ant and the grasshopper? Apparently not.

Great point Herb. What do the top ten cities with the highest poverty rates have in common? Answer They all have been run by Democrats , some for 100 + years.
Einstein "The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over and keep expecting better results." .

It is no worse than anyone else being murdered. I just always hope that when something like this happens to someone in power, they might feel inclined to do their job of protecting the people better. The murders happen, but what are we going to do to dissuade the criminals? Check out "the social gene" as explained by Richard Dawkins.

Like most Rust-Belt cities, the former hog butcher to the world has traditionally been Democrat. But, like Detroit and Cleveland, etc,etc they can't seem to recognize that the only place that holding on to the "workingman's party" has gotten them is the down side of the bell curve.

Why don't the people see through Emmanuels charade and change the govt that promises change and provides a great big zero.

I agree Eyecu2.

It is a variation on the theme of "hate crimes." Hate crimes feature the moral obscenity that, depending on ones motive, "hate murder" is far more heinous that just regular old murder. It naturally follows then that the murder of a person of note - more grievously, thought to be of "merit" - or in this case simply related to one, is more shocking and "horrorful" than one that is just another routine murder of an anonymous, inferior, dolt.

Are you less likely to be murdered if you are related to someone 'important'? The reason for reporting is to gain more notoriety (not fame) for the desires of those who would offer more control. When guns were unavailable because they did not exist governments made it illegal for individuals to own swords for the same reason. To control the populace. The congressman is a influence peddler trying to use his grandson's unfortunate incident to promote his ability to control the populace.

It is interesting that the places with the strictest gun control also seem to be the places with the most gun murders.

Same as everywhere.

...or Russian Roulette.

The operative word-set here is "...is reported..." Thousands of events happen every day that would be on interest to many of us, but only a handful are "reported" to the general population. That is how the media manipulate us, perhaps less so by how they present an event than what events they choose to report, or not to. That is why the internet and a little curiosity are so important for their effectiveness in informing the electorate.

It shows that no one is safe, at least unless he goes around armed.

Horror, no. Expected, yes.
The obvious result of the combination of extreme gun control laws, socialistic economic policies and entitlement indoctrination. Add in the lunacy of trying the same things over and over again and expecting different results, and you have this example of a Democrat Utopia.