Man accused of beating mom, stabbing her in face with icepick

The Gainesville Sun ^ | April 21, 2012 | Cindy Swirko

[ConservativeStatement]

A Gainesville man who beat and stabbed his mother when she refused to give him money for crack cocaine and beer was arrested late Friday night by Gainesville police after a struggle in which he tried to bite an officer, according to an arrest report. William Bernard Lee, 44, of 912 NW 6th Ave., was charged with attempted murder and resisting arrest with violence.

[avenir]

This post does not even begin to address the negative consequences of drug use. On the other hand, a position in favor of prohibition does not eliminate the negative outcomes you have described, either. / All rights come with corresponding duties. If an individual has a legal right to purchase and consume a drug of choice, he also has an obligation to avoid doing physical or financial harm to others, including taxpayers, in the process. / How can this responsibility best be imposed upon the person who claims the liberty?

That is one of the most concise presentations of this issue's double-bind I've read.

[Gator113]

Just look at him... it’s obvious he was just another Skittles addict.

[Tax-chick]

Thanks. This is, it seems to me, the central paradox of liberty. It’s very easy to claim a “right,” even if it’s just in the sense of “they couldn’t stop me.” If it’s not drug use, it could be alcohol, promiscuous sex, driving fast, motorcycling without a helmet, or whatever.

However, even if the person claiming the liberty theoretically “accepts responsibility,” it is nearly impossible fully to impose the consequences on the person who earned them. In the case at hand, even if the man were executed today, that wouldn’t undo the harm to his mother. Even if retribution is painful and significant, for any damage, that doesn’t un-hurt, un-kill, un-do whatever has gone on.

So what is a society to do, in terms of law, for the best outcome. I don’t know. Perhaps start by accepting that there are insoluble problems, instead of searching for easy answers.

[avenir]

Well said (again).

I think we forget that God has his reasons for building or collapsing a nation, reasons we know nothing of. We think it’s all on us, that we must solve the problem of man’s rebellion. That’s exactly what we cannot do. We can only deal with the manifestations that threaten general stability, and this in a remedial way. God alone has the authority and power to Redeem.

[Tax-chick]

Excellent remarks!

We can call the understanding that many serious issues don’t have solutions a “tragic worldview,” but we could as easily call it a Christian worldview. There are limits to what fallen people in a fallen world can do, and the ultimate outcome for each of us is between ourselves and God.