Original sentence: For instance, a homeowner may simply be regarded as justified in using force to protect his or her own property.For instance, in the United States many court decisions have held that there exists no right to police protection (see Castle Rock v.Gonzales ), whereas a householder is generally held to have the right to defend his or her life and property against an intruder.However, enforcement by a third party (other than the rightsholder) is not always regarded as necessary for the existence of a negative right.Some hold that the enforcement of a negative right also requires positive action - for example, the right to be secure in one's home implies that some action must be taken, either by the home owner or by an agency such as the government, to repel someone who attempts breaking and entering
Edited sentence: However, in practice, the enforcement of a negative right also requires positive action - for example, the right to be secure in one's home implies that some action must be taken, either by the home owner or by an agency such as the government, to repel someone who attempts breaking and entering