Saturday, June 12, 2010

This Is What Disarmament Gets You

As if the recent spree-killings in gun-control-paradise England weren't bad enough on their own, it appears their police had actually cornered the killer fairly early in the event. Their unarmed police. All it took for him to escape and continue killing was pointing his gun at them.

As AztecRed points out here, why even have police when all they have to stop a sociopathic killer is strong language?

An American who'd been a police officer in Texas before moving to the UK was appalled at what he was told by his instructors while training to be a British police officer:
"If you ever see somebody carrying a gun, turn and run away as quickly as possible."
That's what they call police training? Gee, here in the barbaric Colonies, the good guys run toward the gunfire, not away. In any American jurisdiction, point a gun at police officers, especially multiple police officers, after you have already murdered people and they will shoot you to the ground. Even just one person with the tools, skills, and will can end a public killing spree.

I hope the panty-wetters in power accept responsibility for the blood on their hands resulting from their creation and enforcement of an utterly depraved public policy of defenselessness. They won't, though. They will undoubtedly use it as an excuse to clamp down even more on inanimate objects instead of their dystopian society that promotes violence by rewarding the violent with job safety and security. Ban weapons for the law-abiding, criminalize defending yourself in any way at all, then train the police to run away from danger? And they wonder why violent crime increases rather than decreases?

Insanity is doing the same unsuccessful thing over and over, expecting a different outcome. And welcome to the blogroll, Barack's Gun Lies.


Anonymous said...

Hell, I will do you one better - not only should the authoritarians who put the laws in place not even be given the chance and directly held responsible, those who even support policies such as the ones in Britain should be likewise held responsible.

Anti-rights nuts go on and on about 'shared responsibility', and this seems like a perfect application for it.

Thanks to the policies of Once-Great Britain, there was not a single citizen who was able to do anything to stop this mass murder, and thanks to the apparently-spineless nature of their police force, as well as their disarmament (yet another glorious policy of the authoritarians out there), they could not either.

And now 12 people are in boxes in the ground.

Would an armed citizen have made a difference? We will never know. But I would damned well prefer that we be given the chance, rather than be force to do nothing more than run away - hardly an encouraging prospect for the old, infirm, or otherwise incpaable.

AztecRed said...

Thanks for the link. I've reciprocated in kind.

I've always referred to the UK as Bizarro World (from DC Comics), because it seems when it comes to criminal-justice and self-defense, everything is the opposite of what it should logically be. Their police are unarmed, criminals are given restitution if they are harmed while committing a crime, and if you defend yourself, or even raise a fist in anger, you're the criminal.

Just a weird place that always manages to find new and exciting ways to become weirder.

Zendo Deb said...

"why even have police when all they have to stop a sociopathic killer is strong language?"

Somehow, this sounds familiar.