After Kenya shopping mall massacre, Interpol chief ponders "armed citizenry" (interview, weapons)

[Little-Acorn]

An oft-repeated saying is that "A conservative is a liberal who just got mugged".

But when an entire populace of law-abiding people are disarmed, and then bad guys kill 67 of them over a period of days in a supposed "gun-free zone" like a shopping mall... that whole populace might become conservative, in one big hurry. And for good reason: They now know that anti-gun laws aren't obeyed by lawbreakers, no matter how much the do-gooders wanted the crooks to obey them.

And when the populace becomes conservative, even the politicians and police forces start to slide that way, however reluctantly.

Genuine conservatives have been making the case for decades, that a society where law-abiding citizens are free to carry guns if they so choose, is a safer society than one where only lawbreakers can carry guns.

Using logic, facts, and The Law of the Land has had little effect on curbing the abuses by leftists and other such gun-rights haters.

Looks like the only way they will start to see the writing on the wall, is if a lot of them get murdered.

Their choice.

---------------------------------------------

Exclusive: After Westgate, Interpol Chief Ponders 'Armed Citizenry' - ABC News

Exclusive: After Westgate, Interpol Chief Ponders 'Armed Citizenry'

Oct. 21, 2013
By JOSH MARGOLIN

Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble said today the U.S. and the rest of the democratic world is at a security crossroads in the wake of last month's deadly al-Shabab attack at a shopping mall in Nairobi, Kenya – and suggested an answer could be in arming civilians.

In an exclusive interview with ABC News, Noble said there are really only two choices for protecting open societies from attacks like the one on Westgate mall where so-called "soft targets" are hit: either create secure perimeters around the locations or allow civilians to carry their own guns to protect themselves.

"Societies have to think about how they're going to approach the problem," Noble said. "One is to say we want an armed citizenry; you can see the reason for that. Another is to say the enclaves are so secure that in order to get into the soft target you're going to have to pass through extraordinary security."

The secretary general, an American who previously headed up all law enforcement for the U.S. Treasury Department, told reporters during a brief news conference that the Westgate mall attack marks what has long been seen as "an evolution in terrorism." Instead of targets like the Pentagon and World Trade Center that now have far more security since 9/11, attackers are focusing on sites with little security that attract large numbers of people.

At least 67 were killed over a period of days at the Westgate mall, more than 60 of the dead were civilians. The Somalia-based al Qaeda-allied terror group al-Shabab claimed responsibility for the attack as it was ongoing but investigators are still trying to determine exactly who planned the strike, where they are and what is next for them. U.S. authorities in Uganda, fearing another similar incident in Africa, issued a warning late last week.

"Ask yourself: If that was Denver, Col., if that was Texas, would those guys have been able to spend hours, days, shooting people randomly?" Noble said, referring to states with pro-gun traditions. "What I'm saying is it makes police around the world question their views on gun control. It makes citizens question their views on gun control. You have to ask yourself, 'Is an armed citizenry more necessary now than it was in the past with an evolving threat of terrorism?' This is something that has to be discussed."


(Full text of the article can be read at the above URL)

[remoddahouse]

Whats the homicide rate generally in armed vs unarmed countries. You looked that up, right?

[Little-Acorn]

In our own Constitution, there's even an amendment that says (in modern language) that "Since an armed populace is necessary for security and freedom, the right of ordinary people to own and carry guns and other such weapons cannot be taken away or restricted."

This is part of the writing on the wall, that the survivors of the Kenya massacre are finally starting to notice.

And it's been there, plain as day, for more than 200 years.

(sigh)

[EmeraldCityWanderer]

Originally Posted by Little-Acorn

In our own Constitution, there's even an amendment that says (in modern language) that "Since an armed populace is necessary for security and freedom, the right of ordinary people to own and carry guns and other such weapons cannot be taken away or restricted."

This is part of the writing on the wall, that the survivors of the Kenya massacre are finally starting to notice.

And it's been there, plain as day, for more than 200 years.

(sigh)

No weapon should be restricted?

I am finding the woman near work with a Lucky Charms box on her head that talks to gremlins a tactical nuclear weapon.

Only good can come from it right? Since it's all for security and freedom, where we cannot apply thinking at all.

[Little-Acorn]

Originally Posted by EmeraldCityWanderer

I am finding the woman near work with a Lucky Charms box on her head that talks to gremlins a tactical nuclear weapon.

Only good can come from it right? Since it's all for security and freedom, where we cannot apply thinking at all.

Hysterical ranting like this is what you usually get from liberals who can't refute the arguments given, but hate the ideas anyway.

[EmeraldCityWanderer]

Originally Posted by Little-Acorn

Hysterical ranting like this is what you usually get from liberals who can't refute the arguments given, but hate the ideas anyway.

I know sarcasm takes a certain level of understanding, intelligence and introspection to get...but I thought you could handle it.

I guess I am disappointed again.

[Little-Acorn]

Originally Posted by Little-Acorn

In our own Constitution, there's even an amendment that says (in modern language) that "Since an armed populace is necessary for security and freedom, the right of ordinary people to own and carry guns and other such weapons cannot be taken away or restricted."

This is part of the writing on the wall, that the survivors of the Kenya massacre are finally starting to notice.

And it's been there, plain as day, for more than 200 years.

(sigh)

I guess the Kenyans have the excuse that such a law does not exist in their country. So the big-govt addicts there, who rely on government for most guidance through life, can tell people they didn't know about this "option" (free people being responsible for their own defense).

But now Al Qaeda has invited their attention to it.

Too bad 67 people had to die before they noticed.

[Little-Acorn]

Actually I guess it was an Interpol officer (International police force/detective agency) who was talking about an armed citizenry.

So maybe the Kenyans STILL haven't gotten the memo. Hard to tell from this article.

The ultimate measure of the freedom of a country, is whether the citizens can carry their own personal weapons and be primarily responsible for their own safety and security (and well-being).

[Little-Acorn]

Originally Posted by Little-Acorn

Actually I guess it was an Interpol officer (International police force/detective agency) who was talking about an armed citizenry.

So maybe the Kenyans STILL haven't gotten the memo. Hard to tell from this article.

The ultimate measure of the freedom of a country, is whether the citizens can carry their own personal weapons and be primarily responsible for their own safety and security (and well-being).

Oh well. Maybe the Kenyan govt figures there are still plenty of Kenyans left they can experiment with, to see which gun-control laws work best.