Guns and England

[jdamon]

(I need to preface this post by saying I lifted it from my blog, http://reclaiming-liberalism.blogspot.com - if you are confused by the name of the blog, check out my original article http://reclaiming-liberalism.blogspot.c ... nyway.html. Who knows, you might learn something new!)


The Herald Sun ran an opinion piece about how the rioting in England was the result of "politically correct policing". http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/sof ... 6112680672

Yes, when things have gotten this bad, soft policing only makes things worse. But is not the root of the problem. We could go back and forth on the policies that really caused what's going on in England. However I think we can agree that a general breakdown in morality is the true cause.

The question is, what is the most fundamental first line defense to amorality? What is society's moat for the criminals that care neither for property nor person? Here's a hint Onelia Giarrantano, who is quoted as saying "Where is the police? I want protection. This is what they're here for . . . I'm not secure at my workplace. I'm not secure at my home place." She has it all wrong.

This has actually been tested in court the USA. In the Town of Castle Rock v Jessica Gonzales case the Supreme Court ruled that the police have no duty to protect us from harm, even if we have a restraining protective order against someone.

So if police (government) has no duty to protect us from the day to day criminals that assault us, who does? Surprise! We do! What do you think the 2nd amendment is all about? It's guaranteeing that we have the means to provide for our personal defense.

Yes, the constitution was formed in part, to 'provide for the common defence'. http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Preamble but note the word common. Personal protection is not the same as common (compare a home invasion to an army invading us) - and thus the government has no duty to provide for it.

This is what makes gun control so insidious. With one hand they are taking away our means to protect ourselves, our families, our neighborhoods, our churches, and our towns, and with the other hand they are insisting that they are not responsible when things like VA tech happen. If you are not familiar with some of the details, police arrived within three minutes of the start of the shootings, but didn't actually enter for about 6 more minutes.

Here is the basic problem with gun control. Those most likely to obey the laws are those who are law abiding and very unlikely to commit a crime anyway. Those committed to acts of violence will seek out an illegal gun, or will use some other implement to make it happen. The people that suffer the most under gun control are the women, the elderly, and the physically impaired. For them, other means of self defense, martial arts, baseball bats, physical force in general, are often not an option. Even stronger men are at a disadvantage because of the illegal guns that criminals can inevitably get.

There is a saying that originated in the 1800's, 'God made man, Sam Colt made them equal'. He was the inventor of some of the most popular guns in US history. I won't argue semantics - there are obvious problems with that saying, but it captures the heart of the usefulness of firearms. They tools. For all the hype about how guns kill, ultimately people kill. Especially with modern firearms, there are so many safeties built into these things that the only way they can lead to death is due to abject carelessness, or because someone means them to cause death (points and pulls the trigger).

Imagine a different scenario in England, pockets of violence crop up from point to point, but when they break into Onelia Giarrantano's Salon, she pulls out a 9mm handgun, or perhaps a shotgun. Not prepared to trash a shop at risk for their lives, the kids take off.

If this was repeated at a few places across the different cities, you can be sure the word would get out. Now, of course the more hardened game types might not be deterred by a few stories, but the kids, the ones doing it for the fun and excitement, would definitely have pause. Not only would this allow the Police to concentrate on the real criminals, but it would limit the property damage, which in an economic downturn, is especially hard to deal with.

Now, of course this didn't happen, one very good reason is that handguns are universally banned in England and gun control laws overall there are extremely restrictive. Maybe not Nazi Germany restrictive, but pretty bad. Oh, speaking of Nazi Germany, has anyone ever told you that many of our American gun control laws are practically copied and pasted out of the Nazi's playbook? Don't believe me? Pick up a copy of "Gun Control": Gateway to Tyranny which was put out by JPFO (Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership). It has a side by side English translation of the Nazi Weapons Law of 1938 and the U. S. Gun control act of 1968. The Free Republic wrote an article on the subject which is quite interesting. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/860211/posts

There have been multiple studies of the affect of guns on crime, but perhaps the best, and the one that has been most resilient to legitimate criticism would be More Guns, Less Crime by John Lott. He analyses crime rates across the US and shows a definitive correlation between increased gun ownership, and decreased crime."

[mamabearCali]

What is even worse in this disarmament of the public is that it seems to have taken the notion of self defense away from people. There are places in the united states that I am not permitted to carry my firearm. The people's republic of NY, NJ, and CA, as examples. However I am never ever without a defense. A pocket knife, a rock, or even a can of soda can be used to defend one's self. The people attacked bleat and bleat about police protection, however they don't seem to think of doing ANYTHING to protect themselves. Even a determined shooter can be overwhelmed by brute force. I guess I should not be, but I am shocked when I hear of one man killing scores of people and no one thought to throw something at him--they just wait for their turn to die. HUH? That does not make any sense to me. If I am going to be shot I am going to do everything in my power to make sure that I am the last one that gunman gets to shoot that day. As bad as I find the disarmament of the people (of firearms) I find the removal of their will to live even against crazy odds even worse.

[gunderwood]

Careful or you will get lumped in with me.

[skeeterss0]

when you defang and declaw the wolf he becomes one of the sheep

[mamabearCali]

You know I really don't think of myself as a "wolf". More like a mama black bear. Most of the time I mind my own business and am pretty non-threatening looking for berries and honey. For heavens sakes, outside my enjoyment of firearms I enjoy crocheting, sewing, and cooking--not exactly rabble rousing. Threaten my family though and watch out! I am betting though if you took out a mama bear's claws and teeth then threatened her family she would try her darnedest to beat you to death with her paws.

[AlanM]

I've posted this before and I feel it bears reposting periodically.
I'm of the opinion that the sheepdog works for the shepherd and his interests are the interests of the shepherd. I much prefer to be a well armed sheep.

The Parable of the Sheep
By Charles Riggs

Not so long ago and in a pasture too uncomfortably close to here, a flock of sheep lived and grazed. They were protected by a dog, who answered to the master, but despite his best efforts from time to time a nearby pack of wolves would prey upon the flock.

One day a group of sheep, more bold than the rest, met to discuss their dilemma. "Our dog is good, and vigilant, but he is one dog and the wolves are many. The wolves he catches are not always killed, and the master judges and releases many to prey again upon us, for no reason we can understand. What can we do? We are sheep, but we do not wish to be food, too!"

One sheep spoke up, saying "It is his teeth and claws that make the wolf so terrible to us. It is his nature to prey, and he would find any way to do it, but it is the tools he wields that make it possible. If we had such teeth, we could fight back, and stop this savagery." The other sheep clamored in agreement, and they went together to the old bones of the dead wolves heaped in the corner of the pasture, and gathered fang and claw and made them into weapons.

That night, when the wolves came, the newly armed sheep sprang up with their weapons and struck at them and cried "Begone! We are not food!" and drove off the wolves, who were astonished. When did sheep become so bold and so dangerous to wolves? When did sheep grow teeth? It was unthinkable!

The next day, flush with victory and waving their weapons, they approached the flock to pronounce their discovery. But as they drew nigh, the flock huddled together and cried out "Baaaaaaaadddd! Baaaaaddd things! You have bad things! We are afraid! You are not sheep!"

The brave sheep stopped, amazed. "But we are your brethren!" they cried, "We are still sheep, but we do not wish to be food. See, our new teeth and claws protect us and have saved us from slaughter. They do not make us into wolves, they make us equal to the wolves, and safe from their viciousness!"

"Baaaaaaaddd!", cried the flock,"the things are bad and will pervert you, and we fear them. You cannot bring them into the flock. They scare us!". So the armed sheep resolved to conceal their weapons, for although they had no desire to panic the flock, they wished to remain in the fold. But they would not return to those nights of terror, waiting for the wolves to come.

In time, the wolves attacked less often and sought easier prey, for they had no stomach for fighting sheep who possessed tooth and claw even as they did. Not knowing which sheep had fangs and which did not, they came to leave sheep out of their diet almost completely except for the occasional raid, from which more than one wolf did not return. Then came the day when, as the flock grazed beside the stream, one sheep's weapon slipped from the folds of her fleece, and the flock cried out in terror again, "Baaaaaaddddd! You still possess these evil things! We must ban you from our presence!".

And so they did. The great chief sheep and his court and council, encouraged by the words of their moneylenders and advisors, placed signs and totems at the edges of the pasture forbidding the presence of hidden weapons there. The armed sheep protested before the council, saying "It is our pasture, too, and we have never harmed you! When can you say we have caused you hurt? It is the wolves, not we, who prey upon you. We are still sheep, but we are not food!". But the flock would not hear, and drowned them out with cries of "Baaaaaaddd! We will not hear your clever words! You and your things are evil and will harm us!".

Saddened by this rejection, the armed sheep moved off and spent their days on the edges of the flock, trying from time to time to speak with their brethren to convince them of the wisdom of having such teeth, but meeting with little success. They found it hard to talk to those who, upon hearing their words, would roll back their eyes and flee, crying "Baaaaddd! Bad things!".

That night, the wolves happened upon the sheep's totems and signs, and said, "Truly, these sheep are fools! They have told us they have no teeth! Brothers, let us feed!". And they set upon the flock, and horrible was the carnage in the midst of the fold. The dog fought like a demon, and often seemed to be in two places at once, but even he could not halt the slaughter. It was only when the other sheep arrived with their weapons that the wolves fled, vowing to each other to remain on the edge of the pasture and wait for the next time they could prey, for if the sheep were so foolish once, they would be so again. This they did, and do still.

In the morning, the armed sheep spoke to the flock, and said, "See? If the wolves know you have no teeth, they will fall upon you. Why be prey? To be a sheep does not mean to be food for wolves!". But the flock cried out, more feebly for their voices were fewer, though with no less terror, "Baaaaaaaadddd! These things are bad! If they were banished, the wolves would not harm us! Baaaaaaaddd!". The other sheep could only hang their heads and sigh. The flock had forgotten that even they possessed teeth; how else could they graze the grasses of the pasture? It was only those who preyed, like the wolves and jackals, who turned their teeth to evil ends. If you pulled their own fangs those beasts would take another's teeth and claws, perhaps even the broad flat teeth of sheep, and turn them to evil purposes.

The bold sheep knew that the fangs and claws they possessed had not changed them. They still grazed like other sheep, and raised their lambs in the spring, and greeted their friend the dog as he walked among them. But they could not quell the terror of the flock, which rose in them like some ancient dark smoky spirit and could not be damped by reason, nor dispelled by the light of day.

So they resolved to retain their weapons, but to conceal them from the flock; to endure their fear and loathing, and even to protect their brethren if the need arose, until the day the flock learned to understand that as long as there were wolves in the night, sheep would need teeth to repel them.

They would still be sheep, but they would not be food!

© 1997 Charles Riggs
Permission to copy and publish as long as author (Charles Riggs) is credited.

[jdamon]

What is even worse in this disarmament of the public is that it seems to have taken the notion of self defense away from people.

Yeah, I suppose I didn't really hammer down on that clear enough, but that is exactly the point I was trying to make when I quoted the lady who wanted the police protection. Removing gun rights has led people to believe that they shouldn't have to defend themselves, someone else (goverment) should do it.

[jdamon]

Thanks for the updated Sheep parable Alan! That was the first time I had read it. I like the twist on the analogy. I would say this though, I don't mind thinking of myself as the sheepdog, because to me the shepherd that I answer to is not government, it is God.

[fireman836]

Thanks for the updated Sheep parable Alan! That was the first time I had read it. I like the twist on the analogy. I would say this though, I don't mind thinking of myself as the sheepdog, because to me the shepherd that I answer to is not government, it is God.

+1

[AlanM]

Thanks for the updated Sheep parable Alan! That was the first time I had read it. I like the twist on the analogy. I would say this though, I don't mind thinking of myself as the sheepdog, because to me the shepherd that I answer to is not government, it is God.

Hmmm, very good point.
However, IMHO, there are a lot of wannabe sheepdogs for that shepherd that I wouldn't follow to a lifeboat on the Titanic.
Please be aware that I did NOT write the parable, Charles Riggs is the author.

[thekinetic]

I keep several non firearm weapons that would make a serious mess of an intruder and not all were intended as weapon including my "walking stick" a nasty narly hunk of maple.

Though I reminded of something I heard a while back concerning the government taking weapons which stated "you can my gun, bullets first!"

[Kreutz]

English society is so fundamentally broken, "soft policing" is one of many many may symptoms of the inherent disease of political correctness and social engineering.

I have several personal friends over there, and it's a bad place to live if you're the type that doesn't toe the line, and even if you are a yob is just gonna shiv you for your mobile anyway.

[TBob]

Thanks for the updated Sheep parable Alan! That was the first time I had read it. I like the twist on the analogy. I would say this though, I don't mind thinking of myself as the sheepdog, because to me the shepherd that I answer to is not government, it is God.

+1

+2

[SlipknotG21]

makes me glad I dont live there and PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN

[jdamon]

Thanks for all the replies people. I just came back to this after all these months. I guess I need to link this to my e-mail so I know when people have responded.

[Kreutz]

Had to share this stunning example of gun control working yet again in Blighty:

Man high on Drugs storms pub with Chainsaw

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... oking.html

Dean Dinnen was high on drugs when he burst into a pub wielding a chainsaw in search a a man who had thrown him out for smoking

A man has been jailed for three years for bursting into a pub wielding a petrol-driven chainsaw while high on drugs after another customer threw him out for smoking.

Dean Dinnen, 24, charged into The Endyke pub in Endike Lane, Hull, armed with the 18in chainsaw to exact revenge on the man who forced him to put out his cigarette.

One of the pub's customers, Adrian Pryor, suffered ruptured tendons as he desperately tried to defend himself with a bar stool.

Dinnen was only stopped after customers managed to overpower him with chairs, bar stools and pool cues. The man he was looking for had actually left before his return.

[clayinva]

Gun registry in England is an out-of-control bureaucratic nightmare. There was an article in the NRA's First Freedon magazine a few months ago - when you buy a gun, you have to pre-register for the type of gun you buy, and if you change your mind and buy something different, you have committed a crime. The system there does not even recognize a right to self-defense. If you hurt someone breaking into your home, you can be arrested.

If we keep the administration we have now and let them replace a couple of Supreme Court judges with some of their own, that is the ideal they will be working toward.

[Wallace]

Gun registry in England is an out-of-control bureaucratic nightmare. There was an article in the NRA's First Freedon magazine a few months ago - when you buy a gun, you have to pre-register for the type of gun you buy, and if you change your mind and buy something different, you have committed a crime. The system there does not even recognize a right to self-defense. If you hurt someone breaking into your home, you can be arrested.

If we keep the administration we have now and let them replace a couple of Supreme Court judges with some of their own, that is the ideal they will be working toward.

Sounds like a return of England of the 1200's. Was it really 1993 that they disarmed the public? How did that happen?