Quote:
HARTFORD, Connecticut (Reuters) - A woman whose face and hands were ripped off by a friend's pet chimpanzee in 2009 came to the Connecticut State Capitol on Friday to ask permission to sue the state for $150 million in damages.
Why on earth does this individual have standing to sue the state? If I'm following the broken logic, she feels the state authorities were negligent because they did not explicitly have policies barring individuals, like her friend, from keeping chimpanzees. I suppose her friend's pockets weren't deep enough so she would rather go after the state despite the fact they don't really share any responsibility for what happened.
There's no limit to the amount of nonsense that people living in a free society can engage in, so how can it all be regulated and everyone treated as young children in a contained environment? It aggravates me that this woman is attempting this and using the argument that Connecticut had an inadequate chimp patrol and monkey brigade to stop things like this from happening.
Also, although it's a legitimate function of government to provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare, that does not innately mean it is a entitlement owed by executive agencies to physically protect individuals. Since law enforcement often coincides with enforcing laws written around individual rights, individuals are often protected. It's nice when they do and they should, but it's not their innate purpose.