• Recent Posts

    • USA Obituary

        In 1887 Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this

    • Soviet System vs Free Market

      In an exchange of comments of this blog’s article “Spending Cuts vs. Tax Increases”, Aiden

    • Bias Alert

      Have you seen the headlines recently ? Every media outlet talks about the assassination of

    • Elections in a Banana Republic

      Breitbart and Infowars, as well as a number of other websites report that Obama’s Messiah-ness

    • Quo Vadis GOP ?

      “If I hear anybody say it was because Romney wasn’t conservative enough I’m going to

  • Libertarian Archive

    • 2012 (197)
    • 2011 (246)
  • Partner in Liberty

  • Find Gult’s Gulch

  • RSS WORLD HEADLINES

  • RSS WSJ.COM US NEWS

  • RSS FOXNEWS.COM

  • RSS THE MISES INSTITUTE

  • RSS REASON.TVT

  • RSS MERCATUS SITE FEED

  • RSS CATO @ LIBERTY

  • RSS CAPITOL COMMENTARY’S DAILY NEWS

  • Nanny Bloomberg’s Super-Whammy

    America’s super nanny, Mayor Bloomberg, landed a super whammy when he was publicly wondering why, in the aftermath of the Aurora massacre, the police forces of the country would not unite and go on strike until appropriate laws would be passed to take the weapons out of the bad guys’ hands.

    No matter how criminally insane I considered his attempts to state-prescribe limitations to the common citizen’s daily junk food diet, I would have very much preferred for him to stick to this subject rather than politically instrumentalize the horrific events in Colorado.

    The NRA’s CEO, Wayne LaPierre, was quite right when he said that if the very same movie-house had not been a gun-free zone, people would have been able to defend themselves. Except, he was not. It turns out that James Holmes had equipped himself with a ballistic helmet, a ballistic vest, ballistic leggings, a throat protector, a groin protector, and tactical gloves. This, of course, would have meant that anyone from the audience firing upon Holmes would have immediately drawn fire upon himself, only to perish shortly thereafter.

    Now, while I continue to believe that the right to bear arms should be part of any country’s constitution, one should realize that it is very difficult for the private citizen to stop a determined mass-murderer like James Holmes, unless one is inclined to wear head- to- toe ballistic gear oneself.

    Clearly, while this could be certainly considered an option, very few, and only the most paranoid, would be exercising it.

    The bottom line is that one cannot protect oneself from everything and everyone. Scum like Holmes, if sufficiently motivated and organized, will always find a way to succeed in their evil undertakings.

    Introducing tougher gun laws, which will disallow law-abiding private citizens to bear arms, will not make it easier or safer for the police officers, simply because assassins, terrorists, burglars, kidnappers, rapists and robbers will be very appreciative of such gun laws, considering that they basically provide them with a sort of insurance policy, which will act as a legal protective gear against their victims.

    On the other hand, the majority of victims of gun-related crimes are being shot by criminals that do not bother equipping themselves with armored gear. And, let’s not forget, while shooters on a rampage always make the headlines, the numbers of their victims constitute a diminishing small minority amongst the unfortunate group of people who die as a result of gun-related crimes.

    There is also something else to consider: unless the shooter chooses a police-ball as the site of his rampage, the police will inevitably always be late, considering the fact that they are only being called once the shooting has started.

    In other words, the private citizen is supposed to surrender his unalienable right to self-defense to a state-controlled entity that cannot be everywhere at once, and that would be able to point to more positive results, if the private citizen were allowed to respond to a vital threat immediately and without any undue delay that is otherwise precipitated by the state’s monopoly on legal weapons.

    In Aurora, three young men threw themselves on top of their girlfriends, shielding them from the flying bullets with their own bodies, and died. Dare one imagine if gun-carrying members of the audience had been present and shown the presence of mind to open fire at the perpetrator?

    The outcome might have been quite different – armored gear on not. This way,  however, dozens of people were gunned down like on a shooting range, unable to defend themselves, unable to retaliate and condemned to hope that the police would be able to apprehend their murderer after their last dying breaths.

    RELATED ARTICLES:

    Bloomberg Calls for Anarchy
    Wednesday’s Weeds and Needs « Witch’s Will
    Obamacare Has An Additional $4 Billion More In Taxes Than Previously Expect..
    Gun Control, Aurora, and the AR-15: Factoids and Foolishness « Stop ..
    Carville and Ice-T: Gun Control is a Loser | The American Jingoist
    Bloomberg: A Little Anarchy Might Help Convince People to Give Up Their Gun..
    BLOOMBERG: POLICE MUST STRIKE UNTIL THEY GET MORE GUN CONTROL « Burst..
    BRILLIANT idea, Mr Bloomberg! | Psychopolitik
    USOFARN.COM: Liberals don’t like the Constitution 
    Links 7/23/12 « naked capitalism

    Leave a Reply





    Fair Use Statement


    This site, on occasion, may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
    .
    In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.