Friday, June 04, 2010

Carry your damn guns, people.

pdb brings the lessons from Cumbria:
  1. There are no dangerous weapons, only dangerous people.
  2. Dangerous people may come for you anywhere, at any time!
  3. Dangerous people don’t have to be that dangerous when they prey on helpless, neutered pacifists.
  4. You are on your own! The police may be restrained by lack of testicular fortitude or bureaucratic sanction. Their only official job is to count the bodies, not to actually protect you or your loved ones.

Word.

I have to agree that the performance of the authorities was abysmal. If you are going to disarm your subjects like inmates in the maximum security wing of the loony bin, then you had best step up to the plate when something like this goes down. You refer to self-defense as "vigilantism" or "taking the law into one's own hands"? Well, if you're just going to leave it lying on the ground with the corpses, somebody needs to take it into their hands.

17 comments:

reflectoscope said...

I wonder what they'll do when someone over there finally has the bright idea to use their car to mow down a crowd of people, all the other tools having been banned and banned and banned some more.

Jim

Anonymous said...

The po po are only there to write up the reports. So only the compatent citizen has the only option as to react, or die. This is why the informed carry.


Walt

Boat Guy said...

T-shirt on the Gunny who was the OIC of the Marine Security Guard Detachment at our Embassy read: "One mind, any weapon."
As noted, it's not so much the tool as the will. One's not much good without the other but if you're only gonna have one the will is the more important.

Joanna said...

As noted, it's not so much the tool as the will. One's not much good without the other but if you're only gonna have one the will is the more important.

I get the flip side of this from my mom all the time. Any little "self-defense tip" becomes a talisman -- if she does X, then bad things won't happen. Which I think is why she's freaked out by the idea of carrying a firearm -- carrying means you acknowledge that things can go bad and you want to be prepared. She (and she's nowhere near alone in this) would rather live in Bad Things Don't Happen land.

I find this mindset annoying at best.

Lissa said...

You refer to self-defense as "vigilantism" or "taking the law into one's own hands"? Well, if you're just going to leave it lying on the ground with the corpses, somebody needs to take it into their hands.

Have they outlawed hands yet?

Tam said...

Only "assault hands" with more than ten fingers.

Nathan said...

I don't normally carry when I travel, but we're going to Detroit this weekend and there will be a weapon with us whether my wife likes it or not.

Of course, in fairness, I'm not planning to tell her I have it with me unless it becomes necessary, and if it becomes necessary, I'm sure it won't matter...

theirritablearchitect said...

I'm guessing at a, "Do it again, only harder!" type of mantra coming from the proles in Ole Blighty.

And they'll get it, too.

And they'll still have the same results next time.

And they'll still wonder why.

Fuck 'em.

Homer said...

Actually, the law has always been in our hands.

"We The People" means that the citizenry is the ultimate authority; we hire police as a convenience for us so they can, as our agent, perform the enforcement duties for which We The People have ultimate responsibility. And, like any employee, they serve at the pleasure of the owner(s) and are subject to whatever employment terms the owners deem desirable and in their best interest, as defined within the terms of the applicable Constitutions.

One of the major problems with police behavior and performance is that of late police, as well as most of government, have come to believe that they're running the show, and that too many We The People have accepted that concept.

Tam said...

Homer,

Yes, but Cumbria is in the UK.

Anonymous said...

Winston Churchill must be shaking his head in Vahalla over the state of is country.

Gerry

Bubblehead Les said...

A wiser person than I (whose name I can't recall) once said the main difference between the US and the UK is that the US was designed to have its Government run by its Citizens, while the UK Government is designed to rule its Subjects. He also said that the only thing preventing the transition from Citizen to Subject is the 2nd. Amendment ( maybe it was Jeff Cooper? Damn this Old Age!) Well, let's see how "Conservative" the UK Tories really are after this shooting. Think they'll start allowing their Subjects the right to keep and bear arms? As likely as BHO admitting he knows what he's doing, I suppose.

B Smith said...

Hmm...perhaps we ought to welcome a new wave of "had it up to here" immigrants from Formerly-Great Britain to the colonies, and expel a few royalists from our shores...

cj said...

Saddest/scariest thing to me is that, if a citizen HAD acted and stopped him, said citizen would likely be up on charges.

staghounds said...

To be fair, actually protecting (if they happen to be there) IS one of the official jobs.

There are plenty of bureaucratic and practical discouragements to that, especially in Britain.

Whether an individual in that position actually does it is another question.

But most police officers still try to protect people in danger.

From lack of familiarity with deadly force and training therein, most British police- like most historically gunless people, including police bosses- regard even the tiniest firearm as the HAMMER OF GOD!!!

And react to them as if they were.

JC said...

Word, indeed. That reads like a bit of Bobby Heinlein.

Matt said...

Even when the police are not "restrained", or disinterested, or actively hostile...even when they're very definitely on your side, wholeheartedly in favor of stopping the bad guys, and equipped both physically and legally to do so, they can't be everywhere.

And the criminals take a fair amount of trouble to operate predominantly where the police are not. I mean, if you were a criminal, wouldn't you?

Even if you anticipate spending your time in a crowded public place with a substantial, visible, and presumably effective police presence...how are you getting there, and how are you getting home? Will you be surrounded by cops while in transit? Unless you're the president of the United States, probably not.

Best be prepared to defend yourself, then. If you're lucky, you won't have to. If you're rather less lucky, you will have to, but when the cops do show up, they'll compliment you on your grouping, rather than handcuffing you and locking you in a cell. If you're less lucky than that...well...move.