Just a few hours ago special ops commandos of the Indian military
stormed a "Jewish center" in an attempt to end the terrorist attacks in Mumbai. Islamist thugs have been on a two day rampage in that Indian city targeting hotels, restaurants, train stations, and other populated places killing with abandon and taking western and Israeli hostages. Prominent in their arsenal of terror were AK 47 rifles and hand grenades.
What if what is happening in Mumbai happened in America? In many "blue states" the results would be the same as in Mumbai. In India criminals have easy access to weapons while "
as the Indian Law stands today a citizen of this country cannot even own a stick without inviting a penalty of 7 years in prison." In liberal bastions like Chicago, New York, and the District of Columbia law abiding citizens are similarly disarmed. So while emergency services run around "first responding" disarmed citizens become unnecessary casualties.
What if the Islamofascist scum tried this in a community where just a quarter of the average citizens were armed? That is, after all, the only defense. The authorities simply can't respond in time. We saw on 9-11 that our emergency services are brave and fearless when under attack. Police, Fire, and EMTs along with
private security rushed into falling towers to rescue those in danger in the face of certain death. Their bretheren converged on New York in the days after to help retrieve the citizens and emergency personnel from under the rubble of those towers. Since then we have seen our military vanquish the enemy in place in Iraq, and given the same chance in Afghanistan they will do so again as the
Marines proved earlier this month.
However, in the face of immediate attack from suicidal and homicidal Islamofascists armed with AK 47s and explosives, seconds matter. Help from police and military is minutes -- perhaps hours -- away. While we mourn the dead and help the survivors of the Mumbai attacks we must also think of our personal responsibility in preparing to meet such attacks on our ho
me front. The enemy is evil and will attack us when and where they can. Shame on us if we are not prepared. All able bodied citizens should make use of whatever laws allow them to be armed and trained to meet these thugs no matter where they appear. All law abiding citiznes need to demand the unfettered ability to exercise our Second Amendment rights from our elected representatives. Eliminate so-called "Gun Free Zones."
The truth is that each American is the first responder to any emergency. Emergency services respond to OUR first response. How will you respond to an Islamist thug aiming a weapon at your family? We all hope we never find out, but hope did not keep the Islamists from toppling the Twin Towers or smashing into the Pentagon. Hope did not stay the trigger of Muhammed and Malvo. Hope did not disarm the thugs in Mumbai.
As a friend of mine says quite often, "I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop."
[UPDATE]
CrimeFile's Paul Huebl reports that India's police and militia are
horribly under armed:
The local city cops are generally laid back. Up to five officers will share a single six-shot American made Ruger revolver with little in the way of reserve ammunition. They are like cops here, committed to keep their cities and visitors safe.
Some police and the military are armed with the venerable FNFAL battle rifle that fires the substantial 3.08 round. We will have to wait and see the present crisis unfold and learn what beef the cowardly terrorists have with American and British tourists. I’m sure the brave Indian police and military members will round up the suspects and things will return to normal.
Jimmie at
The Sundries Shack:
And, please. Don’t give me any nonsense about lax gun laws or any other anti-gun folderol. Criminals will always be able to get all the guns they want because they don’t care about the law. Even if you banned guns entirely, criminals would still get guns because they’re criminals. Breaking the law is built into their job description. Don’t believe me? Look at Washington, DC and Chicago which combine the strictest anti-gun laws in the country with a sickeningly high rate of gun violence.
Via Jimme,
Dr. Melissa Clouthier:
On where...
1. Terrorists like drama and dense populations. So, that would favor a city. Some cities are more suitable–Chicago, DC and New York come to mind. Los Angeles and Houston are spread out. So is Miami. Tight quarters are target rich.
2. So let’s a assume a city. Terrorists like unarmed inhabitants. Well, criminals everywhere are armed, of course. But New York, DC and Chicago all have unfriendly gun laws. Perfect! I was thinking about this sort of thing happening in Houston. It wouldn’t last long. I don’t know the number of people with CHLs (concealed carry handgun licenses), but the number is high. That tends to make the populace less willing to comply.
3. Terrorists like symbolism. The Twin Towers were symbolic of our economic and infrastructure strength.
She sums up...
An armed populace trained to fight back would go a long way to increasing security. The old fashioned notion of militias sprang to my mind just now. Maybe that’s the answer: civilians who band together and train for these situations.
Sounds suspiciously like those evil militias... Horror! One additional point on her post:
The terrorist operations are more like guerrilla combat. High school kids weaned on video games and armed to the teeth might have a better chance against such a well-trained enemy. I mention this because American police forces simply aren’t prepared to deal with street warfare, unless there have been massive training exercises I’m not aware of.
There has been a fundamental change in strategy and tactics for LE confronting "active shooters/killers" since Columbine and VaTech. Current thought is evolving and the doctrine of each LEO actively engaging the shooter(s) as soon as each arrives on the scene is gaining prominence.
See:
Armed Resistance Stops School Shooters -- Surprise...[UPDATE II]
Stacy McCain writes:
There is no fool-proof means of preventing such attacks, in India or anywhere else. The only effective long-term strategy is to identify terrorist groups and their members, place them under surveillance, and try to disrupt their plans by arresting them for weapons charges, immigration violations and the like.
Au Contraire, my Bob Barr supporting friend. The best effective long term (and short term) strategy involves an educated and armed law abiding populace willing and able to stop the thugs when they attack -- and, of course, equipped with cell phones to call in the police to clean up and take the after action reports...
Look, according to reports the Indian populace is unarmed and the Indian police are very ill-equipped (fix cops
sharing a single Ruger revolver? Military
armed with a century old battle rifle?). Modern society must accept that there is an individual and collective responsibility to defend one's life and the well being of the community. That responsibility starts with each able bodied citizen and is necessary for each person to enjoy individual Liberty and for the society to achieve anything close to security.
Yeah, the attacks in Mumbai portend vile things for our nation. That's because we have allowed ourselves to be disarmed and lulled to sleep by the government Nanny State that, like India, has no hope of protecting us. America must wake up to the reasons we have Liberty -- including the Liberty contained in the Second Amendment.
