Kurt Nimmo
December 8, 2011

If Donna Hopper, a 66 year old Redding, California, woman had listened to police during a 911 call, she may have been killed by an intruder.

During a 911 call, a police operator told Hopper not to shoot the intruder breaking into her home. She was told to put down the gun and wait for police.

Hopper instead shot and killed the man with a recently purchased .38 handgun.

The incident is another example demonstrating that police are unable to protect citizens from criminals. Not only are police incapable of protecting citizens, they have no duty to do so.

Before the mid-1800s, American and British citizens were expected to arm and protect themselves. In fact, self defense was considered a civic duty. In America, armed police were considered no different than the dreaded prospect of a standing army.

By the mid-1800s, however, cities began forming police forces and gradually the idea that the citizen is responsible for his self defense diminished. It is now virtually illegal in many large cities to own a firearm for self defense.

As Operation Fast and Furious demonstrated, the government is actively involved in efforts to disarm the public. On Wednesday, we reported on documents obtained by CBS that prove the government launched Fast and Furious specifically as a pretense to argue for more restrictive gun laws.

The government’s efforts to gut the Second Amendment and disarm the public have nothing to do with citizens killing intruders in self defense or even violent Mexican drug cartels. Government is invariably mistrustful of an armed public, especially when that government begins acting tyrannically.

Related Articles