B-b-b-b-but... liberal anti-gu- I mean, pro-common sen- No.. I do mean anti-gun (and anti-contstitution, by definition) folks have been telling me for decades that ordingary gun-carrying people don't stop crimes with guns. That can't happen, they assure me, because as everyone knows, the gun will get taken away, or they might hurt themselves or kill themselves, or scare the shrinking violets of the left so badly that they must seek counseling at the mere sight of a scary, black, loud and powerful handful of equalizing potential; and then of course they insist all gun owners are mentally ill and will almost always run to the nearest public school or mall and commit mass murder because the gun made them do it.
But every good liberal will tell you until they are blue in the face and until you want to cry out to the gods, asking what horrible thing you did in your past life that justify sitting there, listening to the pure flow of bullshit that comes out of their mouths sounding like they are telling you that citizens who carry guns don't prevent crimes.
Only cops preven... well, actually, no, they don't... except by accident, as a secondary function at best. Their job is not to prevent crime, but to discover it, investigate it, and collect revenue for their bosses- and no, that's not "the people"; it's whichever government agency (or corrupt individual) that funds them. This cannot be disputed, since the Supreme Court has ruled that no law enforcement officer has a duty to protect any person, their property, or their rights. They are allowed to watch someone stab you to death right in front of them without intervening. They are allowed to let you bleed to death while waiting for EMS without so much as applying pressure, or even holding your hand. They can let you drown, get beat up by your spouse, and burn to death because they chose not to pull you from your wrecked car when it started on fire.
Knowing this, why in HELL would anyone want to prevent upright, consciencious, educated citizens from carrying guns? The only ones they want to ALLOW to have them don't have to lift a finger to defend anyone, by law, and yet they want to ensure that citizens are unable to defend themselves. Sounds surreal, to me.
This officer, if roles were reversed, could allow the attacker to kill the citizen in front of his eyes and do nothing to stop it, and just wait till there is no longer a hostage in the way of the criminal's capture to get a commendation, promotion, raise, and his name in the national LEO professional journals. All without losing his paycheck, his pension, his other job benefits.. and depending on the cop, maybe without losing his bribe money, or all the neat, cool stuff he gets for the department (and maybe a little for himself on the side) from civil forfeitures that somehow either never make it to the station, or never gets returned and can be used by the department to buy helicopters, M-RAPs, riot gear, infrared cameras to see through your walls or roof, tech devices to intercept your cell calls without a warrant, ... all the trappings that the military has that they salivate over and covet unrepentantly- not to use against a foreign enemy, but against the very people they steal from-I mean terrorize- I mean .. Yeah, I mean terrorize.
Maybe they should spend some of that on gun training and use of force training. Some communication skills training wouldn't hurt, either, like dispute resolution training, intercultural communication, and effective listening. A mandatory class on animal behavior and handling is a must, so they stop killing friendly family pets in front of the children, or while they are chained in their own yards. Such brave souls who kill animals because they felt threatened- not because they were actually attacked or even saw any indication they might be- when there are so many other things to try first to control the situation and ensure the safety of EVERYONE, including those animals- should never be allowed around animals, children or civilized humans let alone be hired as an officer. They are too reactionary, emotional, and too cowardly for the job.
I'd also throw in some mandatory and ongoing anger management that includes teaching the biophysical processes and a psychological education component that teaches them about how and why they will eventually become corrupt, no matter their good intentions- why power attracts the corruptible and by virtue of choosing that profession, they have already shown they are likely to abuse any power they are given. Included in this training should be detailed and intensive education on how to know when they've become an adrenalin junkie and the resulting brain damage that occurs from the hormone continuously being pumped into the frontal cortex-which regulates reactions, rationality, and impulse control- something many cops exhibit a lack thereof.
I'd top it off with mandatory ongoing education on stress management and emotional discipline training, so they can hopefully stop killing the deaf, the mentally ill, old people with dementia, teens trying to run away from them, and middle aged women in their pajamas who have called them for help who get shot through the cruiser door from the passenger's side and across the partner who is driving, more than two minutes after they show up and are talking to her- because the officer was "startled".
These "brave" men and women in blue wouldn't have to be so "brave" if more citizens carried guns, no matter what the liberal anti-gun people will tell you. They are either ignorant, liars, or fools. Its up to you to figure out which one applies to the specific person or persons in your life who are telling you that it should be harder for citizens to buy and own guns, that they never prevent crime, they are too dangerous to have in the house, and that somehow, if people don't have guns, then the criminals won't either. Educate those who are ignorant, call out the liars and expose them by using the facts instead of appeals to emotion, and use your own discretion when dealing with fools- in groups, and individually, they are nearly always more dangerous than the liars who fooled them. No one will hold an idea more dearly than someone who discovers they've been duped, and in order to not appear the fool, they'd rather help the lie by assuring the desired outcome happens so they feel vindicated.
The definition of a criminal is someone who does not follow the law. Making more laws to restrict guns and make it more difficult or even impossible for qualified citizens to own them will not stop criminals from having, getting, keeping, or using them. But it most assuredly will stop more citizens like the man in this video from preventing a cop from getting killed, or a woman from being raped, or an elderly woman who lives alone from having her home invaded, or a school full of children being gunned down by a radicalized zealot or the kid who didn't get to eat at the cool kids' table.
No comments:
Post a Comment