Whatever. Call me a marxist, liberal looney-tunes, or whatever else you care to.
I think you're clinging to principle to obscure the fact that you're a cold-hearted, pennypincher that begrudges a dime given to the federal government. Your fallback position of private charities in this case is ludicrous. The federal government has immediate access to monies and equipment private charities do not. They also possess the power of the state, and that's no small thing when you have to contend with looters and price gougers.
Yes, I am aware that the police TECHNICALLY may not have a duty to prevent crimes from happening...but apparently these officers disagreed with that. I, for one, am glad that they did, though it sadly cost them their lives. They are far braver people than most, when most could and (honestly) should run for safety.
There is a vast difference between helping someone recover from a natural disaster, and "helping" someone pay for things they otherwise could not afford. If you can't understand that, then we're through here.
Have a nice day.
"There is a vast difference between helping someone recover from a natural disaster, and "helping" someone pay for things they otherwise could not afford."
I don't disagree, but the problem in my mind comes in when you try to define "disaster".
If a tree falls on my house and my property is ruined, but my neighbors are not affected, is that a disaster?
If not, why? Aren't I just as bad off regardless if the rest of the town is underwater or not?
Where do we draw a line between a personal misfortune and a natural disaster necessitating federal taxes be allocated for "relief" efforts?
Are you familiar with stories from Florida last year (where I live) in which people were getting supplies from FEMA and then selling them on Ebay or in the paper after hurricane season was over? Is this okay with you? How would you make sure this doesn't happen? Is some amount of waste and fraud okay as long as you feel good about helping some people who are "in need"?