Cynical Nation

This case is solely about two issues - property rights and the fundamental ("God-given) right to self-defense.

Though it's primarily about the latter (the right and responsibility of self-defense), it's also about government's perceived "right" to violate the sanctity of a citizen's (and owner of that government) private abode.

People in every emergency service take risks every day, some are the dangers inherent in those jobs, two NYC cops have been murdered in the line of duty just this past week, firemen are routinely injured doing that job and EMS workers are often exposed to terrible, contagious conditions, but other risks exist and those are the risks that come with making mistakes on those jobs.

EMS workers who fail to provide adequate treatment can be Civilly sued, firemen who do excessive damage, or who drive recklessly on the way to fires are also subject to litigation and so are cops who make mistakes like this one.

These cops were enforcing a high-risk no-knock warrant and made the mistake of entering the wrong dwelling (a humiliating mistake that makes that police force look incompetant)...the burden for that entire fiasco is theirs, no matter what "bad information" they may have gotten, no matter how "good" their intentions may have been. Those cops made a hideous mistake and could have easily killed a righteous citizen, one of the owner's of their employer (the local government).

I can't imagine the kind of cretins who would've convicted a man for merely defending his home with deadly force, which he not only had a right, but if you believe in the founding principles of this country, an obligation to engage in...in other words, Jefferson, Madison, et al would've said that Mr Maye had a duty to defend his homestead with all the force he could muster.

The death of a cop is tragic, but the death of Corey Maye by the police that night would've been an even more profound tragedy because they simply had no business doing what they did.

The citizens of Mississippi have made a tragic error in convicting Corey Maye, if they only had one reasonable person on that jury, it would've been a hung jury...I could never vote for conviction in a case like that, now the government of Mississippi may compound that error by executing a man for merely defending his home, his family and his life with deadly force against an unwarranted intrusion that the state had no right to exercise.

Give officer Ron Jones a posthumous medal, if need be, but he was part of a team that made a terrible, and humiliating mistake (that warrants no medal in my eyes), but give Corey Maye his freedom back, he defended it and he deserves it.

If Corey Maye must die, than strap in all those who were responsible for the planning and executing of that "mistake" (from the officers who executed it, to all those who were involved in the decision making all along the line) and put the needle in their arms too...it makes about as much sense.

Good post, JMK. And a worthy cause, Barry.

Good luck with this, I am a full agreement. This, however, is just not right-wing PC.

I doubt you will get much support on this from the RW blogosphere.

Why would you say that Blue88?

After all, the recent Kelo decsion that attacked property rights went straight along Conservative/Liberal lines with the four most Conservative justices opposing it (Rhenquist, Scalia, Thomas and O'Connor) and the three most Liberal justices (Ginsburg, Breyer and Stevens) all voting in favor (Stevens wrote the majority opinion), while the enigmatic Souter, and often equally perplexing Anthony Kennedy sadly joined with the majority in that abomination.

Actually, I'm glad you're on board with this defense of Corey Maye, given the predisposition of many Liberals to side with the government and against the individual in so many cases.

I know not all Democrats are Liberal (I'm still a registered Democrat myself), and I'd happily vote for Conservative Democrats in the mold of, say, Zell Miller, but those are sadly few and far between of late.

This is clearly a case of an individual whose home was wrongfully and illegally invaded (it isn't any more "legal" because the state apparatus carried it out) and he rightfully defended himself and his property...somewhat similar to the Randy Weaver case of over a decade ago.

If BOTH sides would simply agree wo adhere to strict Constitutional principles, not those "divined by so-called "scholars" today, but according to the writings of America's Founders (ie. The Federalist Papers, etc) themselves, there'd still be some disagreements, no doubt, but at least there'd be more of a chance to find some common ground on most issues.

This is terrible. I can't believe stuff like this is still happening in 2005.

Sorry, Blue, but according to Battlepanda, the righties are now ahead on this one.

http://battlepanda.blogspot.com/2005/12/outrage.html

I'm a black lefty who supports the right to gun ownership and self-defense (I struggle with the death penalty issue) and I don't think this has anything to do with the left or the right. Kudos for admitting that. This is a matter of pure injustice. While I agree that this is not about the justice of the death penalty, I think this is a matter of home defense--mainly that Cory Maye has every right to defend his home and his daughter. This is a blatant abuse of power. Even if the police did announce who they were before breaking in, he should have been convicted for nothing more than manslaugther under the circumstances. People that argue that Maye shouldn't have had a gun in his house have no idea what it is like to try to live a good life in a bad neighborhood. I know lot's of good people of liberal stripes that unfortunately don't have the resources to get out of a situation where predators run rampant and they are prepared to do what they must in the hopes that their children will have a better chance. That's all that Cory Maye did in this instance

Sorry, I hate posting comments annonymously more than I hate double posting. The comment above belongs to me.

Kevin, a "pro-gun Lefty?"

That's got to be a rather small minority within the Liberal community.

I can certainly understand people's problem with the "ultimate punishment," but, when you look at the pantheon of crime, some crimes just seem to scream out for something more final - Ted Bundy's rampage, for instance, John Wayne Gacey's as well.

There are some crimes so horrific that simply calling them "murders" doesn't come close to doing them justice.

Still, I can understand the view that so long as a person could be convicted and later cleared via DNA then it's unwise to use that penalty in all but the most certain of cases (Bundy's & Gacey's would certainly be in that category).

On the recent Kelo Decision that allows local Municipalities to use Eminent Domain statutes to take the propery of individuals and then give that to other private entities (shopping centers, large scale commercial venues, higher end housing, etc) was passed OVER the strenuous objections of the four most Conservative Supreme Court justices - Rhenquist, Scalia, Thomas and O'Connor...and the majority opinion was written by one of the more Liberal members of that court (Stevens).

Many, perhaps even most people are, in fact, Liberal/Left on some issues and Conservative/Right on others and classify themselves either by the predominance of what they perceive their views to be, or sometimes by which Party seems to resonate with them the most - generally Democrats, perhaps after having been excoriated with the "L-word" for decades, more often classify themselves as "Liberal/Left," while more Republicans and Libertarians seem to classify themselves as "Conservative/Right."

It would seem that at least on gun rights, the inalienable right to self-defense and private property rights, you would be more "Conservative/Right," I wonder on how many other issues you would come down on that side.

I was raised in a very Democratic home, went through the standard educational and entertainment indoctrination that most all Americans do, but at some point, probably in my late twenties, I realized that I held far more views that would be classified as "Conservative," than "Liberal" ones.

I agree that many people (including myself) hold some conservative and some liberal views. I think that the majority of my views lean to the left (as contrasted to the Democratic Party--I'm an independent). This reminds me of an article I read a while back arguing that Chris Rock is really a conservative comedian. To vastly oversimplify, the author felt that since Rock is in favor or economic responsibility for black people and is also pro-gun, he must be conservative. I don't think so. If you have ever lived in a neighborhood where some fool will jack you for your shoes, or where one of your neighbors will break into your home, steal your belongings, and then try to sell them back to you the next day, I think you would understand how one can be pro-gun and liberal at the same time. The problem, in my mind, is that the Democratic party and liberalism are assumed to be one and the same. Is that really the case anymore? If someone like Jack Murtha was the face of the Democratic party, I'd be all for them. He speaks the truth as he sees it, and I can still trust him to do what needs to be done to defend my country. The other problem, I think, is that the Democratic party (and the mainstream media) take black people for granted. This is why you see so many former "liberal" blacks moving over to "conservatism" and the Republican party. Black people are expected to fall lock step in line with the Dems. If Dems are anti-gun, it doesn't matter if you live in a neighborhood with drug dealers and gang-bangers. It doesn't matter if you want to see your children have opportunities that you don't have and you're willing to do whatever is necessary to protect them, to help them get out of the ghetto. If you're black and you don't follow the party line, you're a sell-out, a race-traitor. I, for one, reject that kind of thinking. It's not liberal, and as a self-proclaimed lefty, I think it's my duty to speak out and against that kind of thinking.

Wow, sorry to get WAY off topic there.

Simple. Armed men entered his home and he defended himself and his family. The police had options, they chose not to exercise the safer options. They got the wrong house.

This guy is innocent. I'll sign any petition to help free him.

That is, I think, how most people tend to define themselves Kevin, by the preponderance of their ideas or ideals.

And yes, blacks, like many groups are taken for granted by the Party they affiliate with.

The Christian Right can and does make the same charge. The GOP relies on the Conservative Christian vote, especially in the South and West, but the national agenda of the GOP is far different than that the Christian Right would like. In that case, it's a wise move by the GOP, as many of things that Christian Conservatives feel strongly about don't resonate well with other non-denominational Conservatives.

That's probably true with the Democratic Party and say, the Congressional Black Caucus. The Congressional Black Caucus supports higher taxes for more social programs, a roll back on the Clinton-Gingrich Welfare Reform and a broader and more widespread use of race/gender preferences, all of which are unpalatable with many other factions of the Democratic Party.

That seems to be one of the big problems of any group having near monolithic support for one Party or another, much of their agenda must be sublimated in the name of "broader appeal."

It's an ideological dilemma and many in such groups have, from time to time, sought to move to form Third Parties with generally poor results.