RE: Rumsfeld Says He May Drop New Office of Influence

From: Grant Callaghan (
Date: Tue Mar 05 2002 - 14:36:41 GMT

  • Next message: Richard Brodie: "RE: Rumsfeld Says He May Drop New Office of Influence"

    Received: by id OAA20854 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 5 Mar 2002 14:42:01 GMT
    X-Originating-IP: []
    From: "Grant Callaghan" <>
    Subject: RE: Rumsfeld Says He May Drop New Office of Influence
    Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 06:36:41 -0800
    Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
    Message-ID: <>
    X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Mar 2002 14:36:42.0671 (UTC) FILETIME=[2B0D5BF0:01C1C453]
    Precedence: bulk

    >Subject: RE: Rumsfeld Says He May Drop New Office of Influence
    >Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 12:31:19 -0000
    > <<Grant:
    > > Even the laws of most countries make allowances for people when they
    > > defend
    > > "my home, my family, my children, my beliefs, my property." If you shoot
    > >
    > > stranger on the street, you go to jail for murder. If you shoot a
    > >
    > > in your home or while they are attacking your children, or your person,
    > >
    > > is called self defense and not prosecuted. There are no limits to what I
    > > can do in defense of what is "mine.">>
    > >
    > <Derek:
    > > On the contrary, what you describe is virtually uinique to the USA.
    > > Ecuador and the UK (where I have some personal experience) would put you
    > > behind bars for a very long time if you shoot somebody just because they
    > > are intruders on your property. The situation in the USA is a
    > > relic of the time when cowboys had to forcibly clear stray indians off
    > > their ranches. The law had to be made so that they could do this
    > > ending up in court every other day. It's a historical accident, not a
    > > cultural universal.>
    > >
    > Very true, although that case in the UK a year or two ago (The
    >Martin case was it?) suggested that at least some proportion of the
    >population felt that it should be legitimate (although not me- shooting an
    >unarmed teenager in the back as they were trying to get out of the property
    >is not self-defence to my mind).
    > I think Grant's wider point about territoriality is basically right.
    >I don't want to stir up the Aussies on the list, but there seems to be two
    >diametrically opposite views about aboriginals in Oz, either the
    >colonial one of disdain and control (evidenced by Prince Phillip's spear
    >throwing comments the other day- oh we Brits are so proud...), or a
    >guilt-ridden over-celebration and over-estimation of their culture and
    >capabilities (a bit like those pro-native americans who refuse to accept
    >that the Anasazi might have been ritualistic cannibals as the archeology
    >strongly suggests).
    > Vincent
    I always thought the old saying, and thus the sentiment, that "a man has a
    right to defend his castle" was handed down to us by our English ancestors.
    Of course, I am not enough of an Anglophile to be sure of that, the it's how
    I remember it.


    Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at

    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 05 2002 - 14:52:07 GMT