Gun Control!!

**BDTR** · 10-22-2003, 10:02 PM

A locked gun is useless, i have no children, i have no reason to lock my weapons. I have rifles, handguns and shotguns placed in my house so i can access them from anywhere, I have a shotgun in my bathroom as well. I sleep with a .45 under my pillow. Call me paranoid, i say im prepared for anything.

**BDTR** · 10-22-2003, 10:03 PM

This is coming from someone who was shot while he's sleeping by his roomate over a girl, if that explains anything.

**Red Ketchup** · 10-22-2003, 10:18 PM

Gun laws in Canada are simple...

Here in Canada, firearm ownership is a PRIVILEGE, not a right.

Nobody may own a prohibited weapon. Those are basically assault weapons.

Citizens may own restricted weapons (handguns), but each handgun requires a permit to purchase and own it in a specific location and may not move it without getting a transport from point A to point B permit every time. The purchasing permit is a LONG and complicated process needing valid reasons, references with interviews, and a deep investigation of your past. Nobody may carry a handgun on their person (except law enforcement while on duty).

Citizens may own hunting weapons (rifles and shotguns), but requires a general permit to purchase and own hunting weapons and must register each purchase with the gov. They may be kept anywhere you want. The general permit is basically a background investigation and is valid 4-5 years. This permit is also required to purchase amunition.

NO weapon may ever be stored loaded. All weapons MUST be stored with a trigger lock, or with it's fireing mechanism disabled. No weapon may ever be carried loaded in or on a moving vehicle (yes even hunters on ATV's). If you or your wife files for divorce, you or she may request that the other persons weapons be impounded by the cops for up to a year.

Now those were the "Readers Digest" version of the laws here in Canada... they do a great job controlling us *law abiding* citizens. They do nothing to control criminals or someone who really wants to kill another person.

-In real life here in Montreal all criminals and gang members do have illegal handguns and assault weapons and all the laws and bans the politicians can pass won't change that.
-In real life over 1/3 of legal hunting weapons are not registered.
-In real life I can buy an illegal handgun and ammo all over town.
-In real life crooks won't even bother trying to steal my or your guns, it's too much trouble when you can buy an illegal pistol down the street.

Red

**PurePower** · 10-22-2003, 10:29 PM

Originally Posted by bdtr

A locked gun is useless, i have no children, i have no reason to lock my weapons. I have rifles, handguns and shotguns placed in my house so i can access them from anywhere, I have a shotgun in my bathroom as well. I sleep with a .45 under my pillow. Call me paranoid, i say im prepared for anything.

i agree with you totally. I also have no children or a wife fo that matter. I do have a guncase where i keep some of them but the be Benelli and my Kimber are always close by. But when i eventually have children i will teach them to have respect for guns. Make no mistake about it though, i will ALWAYS be armed kids or no kids.

**LostUp** · 10-22-2003, 11:15 PM

You know I was reading this topic, and I don't have any guns yet but believe me when I tell you I plan to get a few ASAP. I read some one say something about the Govt getting out of control one day. That argument is hard to make because it seems so far fetched but one thing it certainly does and can do is keep a good balance between police and citizens. I know people always think "police are good and here to help" but thats not always the case. A famous situation always comes to mind when I think of this when I certain famous rapper was coming down the road when he noticed a man being beaten up by cops... the rapper tried to get the cops to stop and when they refused he shot the two cops and saved the man.

Obviously charges came up against the rapper but the chargest were dropped after they found out the cops were drunk and off duty. Or atleast the story goes somewhat to that tune. I know of lots of people who have been beaten up by cops, sometimes they deserved it, but sometimes they did not. All I know is that if a cop wants to beat on me for no reason I atleast want/ deserve a fighting chance. And last is the obvious arguement, if someone comes in my house at night I'll have to pray they don't have a gun... because all I have is a few knives, and I'll be damned if I want to see someone I care about hurt. BTW I have nothing agains cops and I'm sure of it that most of them are good people and that rapper was Tupac Shakur.... if you didn't already know.

**BDTR** · 10-22-2003, 11:18 PM

Rule #1, dont shoot cops

The rapper deserves the death sentence.

I've been beaten up by cops before when i was younger, but you know what? I deserved it.

Tupac shakur wasn't a "good person", im sorry, but "gang bangers" deserve to be either in jail or dead.

**LostUp** · 10-22-2003, 11:31 PM

Oh I definatly hear you, definatly, but my point is (which maybe I didn't make clear) that cops carry guns, and sometimes they get carried away, in my eyes a cop has no more right to beat on me then you do or the gang banger down the street does. A cops job is not to knock sense into me or anyon else, its to get the suspect under control, and then transport that criminal/ suspect. I mean if I were to swing at a cop an the they beat me stupid, then obviously I deserved it... but sometimes its just not that way. Oh yeah, BTW I never said he was "good" and actually I don't think he ever said he ws good either. I just think it was a good thing he did... thats just my opinion. Because I know that if I was an innocent guy (or maybe not "innocent" but not deserving that anyway)getting beat up on because some stupid cops had a bad day, got drunk and just felt they needed to take it out on someone, I would hope someone would do that for me too, mighty brave I think. And maybe I'm wrong but I'm almost positive he wasn't in any gang... but I hear you though.

**PurePower** · 10-22-2003, 11:50 PM

LostUp a cops job is sometimes to knock sense into people. you said "its to get the suspect under control, and then transport that criminal/ suspect" what if the suspect has just raped a young girl or has kicked the shit out of their mother( trust me i have seen it). They deserved to get the shit beat out of them. Trust me it is not wise to hit a cop because you will get the shit kicked out of you maby not at the scene but one way or another. It is not fun to get pepper sprayed either.

**realityarts** · 10-22-2003, 11:50 PM

Originally Posted by PurePower

I am a police officer and i carry my weapon where ever i go. I do beleive that a law abiding citizen should be able to carry a weapon, if he or she so chooses. I do beleive that there are certain critera for a person to be able to posses a CCW, NO FELONIES, NO DUI/DWI'S, NO DRUG CHARGES( COKE, METH, HEROIN etc etc). They should also be responsible for taking a State mandated class on how to properly use the weapon. I also beleive that the tag on your car should have some kind of reference on the tag , or in the information the tag provides, to alert the officer that a weapon is in the car. It is written in our Constitution that "We have the right to bear arms" and if you are a "good" citizen then you most certanly have the right.

A cop should approach every car as if there is a weapon in there. Criminals will not opt for the tag! I don't believe that a person walking down the street with an authorized (CCW) conceiled firearm needs to wear a tag on his/her forehead stating that s/he's packing either.

**PurePower** · 10-22-2003, 11:52 PM

Originally Posted by bdtr

Rule #1, dont shoot cops

The rapper deserves the death sentence.

I've been beaten up by cops before when i was younger, but you know what? I deserved it.

Tupac shakur wasn't a "good person", im sorry, but "gang bangers" deserve to be either in jail or dead.

Yes i agree with rule number one btdr =-)

also tupac was a "thug rapper" and got what he deserved.

**PurePower** · 10-22-2003, 11:58 PM

I feel your brain is the most important weapon. The gun is a tool and nothing more. If its concealed no one will know you are armed. The thing is don't look like food. You got to portray your confidence when on the streets. Its all about looking the part... most criminals will not bother with people who look like they know what's going on around them. Hard target... they want easy prey (someone that looks at the ground, slouches, not paying attention, looks uneasy, etc...) and not someone that wants to fight back. So your demeanor is your deterrent. If things go south I resort to how I was trained. But hopfully "acting the part" will keep most people out of harms way. Stay in condition yellow (relaxed state of awareness) and you'll be fine.

I like to play the "what-if" game to keep me sharp (being mentally and physically ready to deal with an attack). Who said it? "chance favors the prepared mind?" oh well...

**BDTR** · 10-22-2003, 11:59 PM

You know, cops have a hard job. Dealing with the scum of the earth day to day, especially in georgia. Pure power, are you from ATL? I'd hate to be a cop there, it's a pit. Although i've been mistreated by cops in the past, its also a cop who helped me get my record cleaned for firearms, so you know it can go either way. Sometimes a cop needs to use a little force, hell i know if i were in the rodney king beating, he would have got it worse than he did. You resist, you get beat, simple as that. Oh and cops should have an open lisence to beat up and arrest "thug rappers", not just because its funny, but because its deserved.

**Animal Cracker** · 10-23-2003, 12:03 AM

As a I have spent time with UN/NATO as a peacekeeper, I can say that if more people were armed..there would not be a need for Peacekeepers!! Give everyone a FN-FAL and let 'em fend off the encroachers!
Also more close to home, when the democrats and liberals let all the criminals out of jail (or across the border), to secure an electorate, I can sleep easy to know my Hi-Power is "condition 1", as is my Krinkov..

**PurePower** · 10-23-2003, 12:20 AM

Im sorry to hear that you were mistreated btdr, there are some cops out there that have no buisness wearing a badge. But thats like anything else. There is good and bad in everything.

I myself am not perfect either. and have had my "fun" days too =-)

**BDTR** · 10-23-2003, 12:21 AM

No no, i deserved what i got when i was younger. I was a prick.

**PurePower** · 10-23-2003, 12:24 AM

LostUp. You guys hate the cops when they are against you, but cry when they aren't there to help you out.
"You may beat the rap, but you won't beat the ride"

**tryingtogetbig** · 10-23-2003, 08:01 AM

Hey guys...I don't think LostUp is cop-bashing...I think what he was trying to say was "you never know what in the hell could happen" more than anything. I have heard of some pretty bad things that cops have done, but I don't think anyone would have a chance with crooked cops, no matter if you're armed or not.

I'll always declare that I have a concealed weapon to a cop, so if they are going to do something bad...they are going to take my gun while they have me at gunpoint. Pointing a gun at a cop will only result in one outcome.

Thankfully, the number of crooked cops out there is a VERY small number.

On the flip-side...the number of bad-guys out there is a much higher number. The odds of getting beat by a bunch of drunks, gangbangers, etc. is a MUCH more likely.

I have many, many cop friends at all levels (city, county, state and federal) and know what will get you "mis-treated" and what won't. RESPECT will get you further than anything. Even if they (cop buddies) are on a domestic call where a guy has been thumping on his old lady, if the guy says "yes sir/no sir" and doesn't resist, 99% of the time nothing will happen to the guy from the police officers. They would like for the guy to resist, but if he doesn't...no game. But, if you show no respect to any of them...the things they can and do get away with is amazing! Funny as hell too!

peace,

ttgb

**Testify** · 10-23-2003, 08:42 AM

I am not going to persuade anyone here, so I will not waste my time trying to do so. This is an opinion thread, and I already gave mine. But I want to say that I am absolutely shocked by the vast majority here that advocate concealed weapons for regular citizens. Again, I don't have any problem with people having guns, especially in their homes, but to say that it is a good idea to let everyone secretly carry one around?

I am also amazed that the last several posts seem to think that police brutality is OK, and even that it is the job of the police to punish a suspect/criminal. That is just wrong, I think its sad that it is not obvious to you all.

**tryingtogetbig** · 10-23-2003, 08:55 AM

Originally Posted by Testify

But I want to say that I am absolutely shocked by the vast majority here that advocate concealed weapons for regular citizens. Again, I don't have any problem with people having guns, especially in their homes, but to say that it is a good idea to let everyone secretly carry one around?

I am absolutely shocked that anyone would be against letting people carry concealed weapons...so our opinions wash each other out.

And...I don't have a problem with people not having guns in their homes, so I say that we shouldn't pass any laws requiring you to have loaded guns in your home.

We should get along just fine!

peace,

ttgb

**Bigen12** · 10-23-2003, 09:22 AM

Originally Posted by Testify

I am also amazed that the last several posts seem to think that police brutality is OK, and even that it is the job of the police to punish a suspect/criminal. That is just wrong, I think its sad that it is not obvious to you all.

I am curious, have you had much exposure to the darker side of life?
You know life on the streets, dealing with the lower classes of society?

If some shit bag, god for bids, was to do serious harm to your family or to a child that you know would you still be against a little payback?

A friend of mine awoke one night to someone breaking into his house. He quickly reached under his bed and retrieved his 38, and waited. The intruder walked into his bedroom and raised a pipe above his head, to strike my friend in his sleep. My friend shot him in the shoulder. The intruder hit the floor and started begging for his life. When the police got there the intruder started telling my friend that when he gets out he is going to come back and kill him. When the intruder was gone, a sheriff deputy told my friend that he should have killed him when he had the chance. I think the sheriff deputy is absolutely correct; my friend should have shot that shit bag until he was dead.

Until you deal with some of the scum bags out there, you have no idea what goes through their heads. Some times a good ass kicking is exactly what they need.

**tryingtogetbig** · 10-23-2003, 09:30 AM

That's the difference in people...some live in reality...others live in some Fairyland World their whole life.

My wife knows that no matter what, when, where or how, I'll always be able to protect her. I take that responsibility very seriously. I could never live with myself if something were to happen to her while she was in my care.

peace,

ttgb

**BDTR** · 10-23-2003, 09:34 AM

Amen bigen, my thoughts exactly.

Swellin · 10-23-2003, 12:13 PM

Originally Posted by Testify

I am not going to persuade anyone here, so I will not waste my time trying to do so. This is an opinion thread, and I already gave mine. But I want to say that I am absolutely shocked by the vast majority here that advocate concealed weapons for regular citizens. Again, I don't have any problem with people having guns, especially in their homes, but to say that it is a good idea to let everyone secretly carry one around?

I am also amazed that the last several posts seem to think that police brutality is OK, and even that it is the job of the police to punish a suspect/criminal. That is just wrong, I think its sad that it is not obvious to you all.

Testify, I certainly respect your opinion and your right to it (so please do not take this as a flame).

Have you ever considered that Utopia does not really exist. Your ideas are perfect for a utopian society; however, it is not at all like that here. No, guns don't keep us from Utopia...they help preserve our way of life and protect our rights. You might be surprised to find out how many of us have actually used a firearm for protection. The simple act of brandishing a firearm has thwarted many attacks.

Bad guys at the car wash, shit heals that beat women, rapists, theives in the night...these are all realities. Removing our legal firearms will not change any of this. Those firearms will, however, protect many of us.

Adrenaline certainly plays a role when officers enter a situation like I mentioned above. In some instances, a sound thrashing is necessary. Police brutality is a PC catch phrase that often encompasses necessary ass whippings.

**Testify** · 10-23-2003, 01:39 PM

Originally Posted by swellin

Testify, I certainly respect your opinion and your right to it (so please do not take this as a flame).

Have you ever considered that Utopia does not really exist. Your ideas are perfect for a utopian society; however, it is not at all like that here. No, guns don't keep us from Utopia...they help preserve our way of life and protect our rights. You might be surprised to find out how many of us have actually used a firearm for protection. The simple act of brandishing a firearm has thwarted many attacks.

Bad guys at the car wash, shit heals that beat women, rapists, theives in the night...these are all realities. Removing our legal firearms will not change any of this. Those firearms will, however, protect many of us.

Adrenaline certainly plays a role when officers enter a situation like I mentioned above. In some instances, a sound thrashing is necessary. Police brutality is a PC catch phrase that often encompasses necessary ass whippings.

No offense taken. It is refreshing that you are able to express your thoughts rationally, when this thread has turned into a frenzy of anger, at best. I just have a different view. I can accept that you think that people in our society are responsible enough to carry concealed weapons and that they will make good decisions - even that it is necessary. I just disagree. I think that some of the responses in this thread show why this is potentially dangerous. Some people here admittedly look for a reason to commit a violent act. That is some frightening pathology. I'm not saying all of you, or even most of you. Don't read that.

I can also allow for the fact that suspects get roughed up a little. It happens when someone resists or does something stupid during an arrest attempt. But I don't see how it is appropriate for a law enforcement official to physically assault a subdued suspect. I don't really see it as "necessary." Punishment is to be administered by the courts, through the application of the law. I don't see anything wrong with that distribution of power.

Its about time to let this thread die.

**tryingtogetbig** · 10-23-2003, 02:15 PM

Originally Posted by Testify

It is refreshing that you are able to express your thoughts rationally, when this thread has turned into a frenzy of anger, at best. I think that some of the responses in this thread show why this is potentially dangerous. Some people here admittedly look for a reason to commit a violent act. That is some frightening pathology.

Frenzy of anger...WoW!

I have got to come visit your world sometime. I'm not angry...just don't understand people telling me what I should be able and not able to do! All a matter of respect in my book. Now if you'd like to see angry...

I never, nor did anyone above that I can recall, say anything about looking for any reason at all to commit violent acts. Of course, if you promote the act of taking away my rights or screw with my family...yeah, then things could get a little ugly. If that makes me irrational...then I'm guilty as charged!

peace,

ttgb

**Bigen12** · 10-23-2003, 02:32 PM

You have to realize that Testify is an Architect, and to an Architect, the world is flat and nothing is in the way, that is why I spend hours a day writing RFI's, Change Orders and going over Design Clarifications.... just joking with you Testify

**Terinox** · 10-23-2003, 05:21 PM

How many of you actually carry a gun (on you). Where in the states can you go with this gun? How many of you do it illegally? How many legally?

Just curious, thnx.

**Bean666** · 10-23-2003, 06:05 PM

Originally Posted by Terinox

tryingtogetbig, you want to protect your family? How come some of these guys need 6-7 LOADED guns to do this??? And we ALL know not all those guns are used for hunting, a lot of those guns pure purpose is to kill, and are military issue and what not, I don't get that.

I mean, what do you need an automatic rifle or something that holds like 30 bullets or something (I don't know shit about guns by the way). There are these AK-47's or something and I mean do they expect that Saddam or Bin Laden is actually gonna be sending in 20-30 terrorists straight to your home to kill you? Or a gang of 30-40 people are gonna raid you're home that you need a full automatic with 10-20 full clips?

there are extremists out there for everything... those that have tons of loaded guns (not counting collectors that have unloaded guns, its very different)... and then there are those just like yourself that think they should be banned altogether...
extremists everywhere and thats whats ruining in the world

**BDTR** · 10-23-2003, 06:13 PM

Extremists were ruining the world? And here i thought the left wing was.

Swellin · 10-23-2003, 10:26 PM

Originally Posted by bdtr

Extremists were ruining the world? And here i thought the left wing was.

'Course, left wing extremists!

Well Terinox, in answer to your question about who carries...that depends on your definition (based on some of the posts in this thread, that answer may vary).

I do not leave the house without a loaded firearm in my vehicle. I have one in each vehicle. In some situations, I carry it on my person. I carry one on my person even more often during hunting season. Sometimes, I carry them concealed. Other times I carry them exposed...it depends on the situation.
If you carry concealed, you are less apt to worry others.
I carry legally...I'm licensed.

**Terinox** · 10-24-2003, 08:18 AM

Originally Posted by swellin

'Course, left wing extremists!

Well Terinox, in answer to your question about who carries...that depends on your definition (based on some of the posts in this thread, that answer may vary).

I do not leave the house without a loaded firearm in my vehicle. I have one in each vehicle. In some situations, I carry it on my person. I carry one on my person even more often during hunting season. Sometimes, I carry them concealed. Other times I carry them exposed...it depends on the situation.
If you carry concealed, you are less apt to worry others.
I carry legally...I'm licensed.

So, if you are licensed, you are allowed to carry a gun ON YOU, in the open?! I mean, you just have it around you, in a gun holster? I mean is that what you mean by exposed? Kind of like a cop does? And where are you allowed to do this though? I mean, you can walk down the street like that, but can you walk into a store?

Swellin · 10-24-2003, 09:18 AM

Originally Posted by Terinox

So, if you are licensed, you are allowed to carry a gun ON YOU, in the open?! I mean, you just have it around you, in a gun holster? I mean is that what you mean by exposed? Kind of like a cop does? And where are you allowed to do this though? I mean, you can walk down the street like that, but can you walk into a store?

Yes, by exposed, I mean in the open...similar to a cop. The state law is rather vague about the specific do's and don'ts. There are certain places where carry (concealed or otherwise) is illegal. Unfortunately, that ambiguity lends to differing interpretations by each officer. I have spoken with my CLEOs, and with a couple of state judges concerning this issue. I have a pretty good feel for the local interpretation, but I am pretty careful, when I travel out of my region (a couple of times a week).

I usually carry in the open while hunting with a handgun. When I hunt with a handgun, I usually carry one of my larger wheelguns. They do not readily lend themselves to concealed carry. I will have that firearm in a holster, on my hip, before...during...and after the hunt. I will remove it and place it in my safe upon returning home and changing clothes.

Swellin · 10-25-2003, 08:21 PM

Well, I just read this on another site, and thought I would post it here. I am not making any argument with this post, simply pasting it for your consumption.

nation of thieves
Writer's note: Difficult as it is to be critical of a friend and ally on the war on terror, Great Britain has instituted a cruel and unjust gun-control policy, a worsening evil, upon her law-abiding citizens that needs correcting. The title of this essay comes from the seemingly paradoxical unrelenting tide of thievery and burglaries that has swept Great Britain, and was so dubbed by the London Sunday Times in 1998.
By Miguel A. Faria, Jr.
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com

Have you read about the strange case of Tony Martin and Britain's du jour gun-control injustice? In the October 2003 issue of America's 1st Freedom, Wayne LaPierre, NRA executive vice president, revealed in perfect clarity how Great Britain's stringent gun-control laws and abolishment of the right to self-defense have brought the birthplace of classical liberalism to the footsteps of tyranny.

Who are the bad guys?

Briefly, 57-year-old British farmer, Tony Martin, who lived in a remote farmhouse in England and had been terrorized several times by burglars, shot and killed such an intruder in his home. Another thief accomplice escaped.

For this act of self-defense in his own home – and in the same country where the great statesman Sir Edward Coke (1552-1634) declared boldly that a man's home is his castle – a free citizen, Tony Martin, was sentenced to life imprisonment as "a danger to burglars!"

While Martin languished in an English prison, the other thief went free after spending only 18 months in jail. The British government granted the felon, who had previously been convicted of 34 crimes, 5,000 pounds of taxpayers' money as legal aid to file a lawsuit against Martin for emotional distress. Incredible, but true!

It is not surprising, then, that in London, a person's chances of being mugged are six times greater than in the Big Apple! Nor should it surprise anyone that in England, day burglary is commonplace and dangerous because burglars know that even if the homeowner is present, they are defenseless and at the "mercy" of the thief.

Tony Martin was freed after serving four years in prison, but today, he is forced to live in safe houses in fear for his life. Threats have been made against Martin's life by other thieves and relatives of the dead burglar: "He will get it. Something will happen to him, it's got to ... To those who say it's just talk, I'd say wait and see. The detectives can't be with him all the time, can they?"

As reported in "America's 1st Freedom," another conspirator boasted, "He is a dead man ... It will be a proper hitman, a professional job."

Martin cannot be protected from the thieves by the police, nor as a convicted felon can he leave Britain. Least of all, he cannot use a gun for self-protection.

In Great Britain today, draconian gun-control laws are firmly in place and there is no right to self-defense. All handguns are banned in places of business and even in the home. Firearm registration facilitated disarmament and confiscation in 1998. Simple possession of a firearm carries a 10-year prison sentence, and yet, England's pusillanimous criminal-justice system emphasizes rehabilitation of hardened criminals and revolving prison doors for all habitual thieves and burglars.

The thieves in the Gulag Archipelago

Recently, while scouring through the epic volumes of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's "The Gulag Archipelago" – III and IV – I discovered some interesting observations made by the illustrious Nobel Prize-winning author about the nature of thieves in the former USSR "in freedom" as well as in the gulag's corrective (destructive) labor camps. We learn that in the Soviet Union, even at the height of Joseph Stalin's reign of terror and bloody purges (at least 20 million lives), the thieves were considered "socially friendly" elements, and were useful and used extensively by the Soviet government.

The thieves not only terrorized the population as haters and defilers of private property, but were also used as informants, and in the gulags as "instructors" in the cultural and educational sections or as officers by the internal security police (the MVD). Needless to say, they were also useful to the repressive apparatus as the proverbial stool pigeons and enforcers of hard labor and terror against ideological (political) prisoners. When needed, they even worked hand in glove with the security forces in carrying out mass murder in the extermination camps of the gulags.

While citizens were arrested, hauled up to the gulags for slave labor and saddled with long prison sentences (10- and 25-year sentences were typical), Solzhenitsyn writes:

Sentences [for the thieves] were bound to be reduced and of course for habitual criminals especially. Watch out there now, witness in the courtroom! They will all be back soon, and it will be a knife in the back of anyone who gives testimony!

Therefore, if you see someone crawling through a window, or slitting a pocket, or your neighbor's suitcase being ripped open – shut your eyes! Walk by! You didn't see anything!

That's how the thieves have trained us – the thieves and our laws!

In the destructive-labor camps of the Soviet Union (1918-1956), the thieves robbed, tortured and murdered political prisoners with impunity. Indeed, they were rewarded with higher food rations, better living space and other privileges for collaborating with the guards and fomenting terror.

It makes hair stand on end when we see that parallels can be drawn between today's coddled thieves of the soft-left (social) democracy of Great Britain and the erstwhile, hard-left communist utopia of the former USSR.

Solzhenitsyn writes that fear of exceeding the limits of self-defense for individual Soviet citizens "led to total spinelessness as a national characteristic" on the part of the individual and total omnipotence on that of the criminal state. When a military officer, mind you a Red Army officer, defended himself from an assailant and killed the hoodlum with a penknife, the officer got 10 years for murder. "And what was I supposed to do?" the officer asked. The Soviet prosecutor replied: "You should have fled!"

"Flee!" That distant Soviet echo reverberates in modern British society – "Scream, run, shout!" – and not only in the United Kingdom, but also in other former members of the British commonwealth, such as Canada and Australia. In those nations, there is no recognized right to self-defense, and citizens are also told to run and flee from assailants. Human dignity – self-defense, private property – out the window! But what if they cannot run and their shouts are not heard? Are women supposed to allow sexual predators to rape them? Tony Martin, who lived on an isolated 350-acre ranch, was told by the British constable that he should have shouted!

Astonished we learn (or relearn) from Solzhenitsyn that in the heavily militarized Soviet Union, "The State, in its Criminal Code, forbids citizens to have firearms or other weapons, but does not itself undertake to defend them!"

Moreover, he writes, "The State turns its citizens over to the power of the bandits – and then through the press dares to summon them to 'social resistance' against these bandits. Resistance with what? With umbrellas? With rolling pins? First they multiplied the bandits and then, in order to resist them, began to assemble people's vigilantes (druzhina), which by acting outside the legislation sometimes turned into the very same thing."

Sociologic parallels anyone?

In the U.S., some people may be afraid to go out at night in the big cities, but Americans have a right to defend themselves, and most states now allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed firearms for self-protection. American women, especially, have the right to defend themselves with firearms to prevent being raped or murdered by sexual predators.

In England, people live in fear in their own homes, afraid of muggers and burglars – not even possessing the right to defend their homes, themselves or their families with any weapon, not to mention a firearm!

One cannot avoid seeing a resemblance between the permissiveness and obsequiousness extended to the thieves in Great Britain and in the Soviet gulags as "socially friendly" elements, as opposed to honest, law-abiding citizens in the British empire and the political prisoners of "The Gulag Archipelago." Are law-abiding British citizens today playing the hapless role that the ideological political prisoners played in the former Soviet Union? If so, whom does the British government consider the real domestic enemies? Thieves? Terrorists? Or, honest citizens?

We hope the British come to their senses and begin punishing the real criminals, giving them their just dessert; allow lawful, honest citizens to keep firearms for self and family protection; and cease their unjust policy of citizen disarmament. In other words, punish the thieves and real criminals and allow the law-abiding citizens to exercise their natural right of self-defense as is their due, and their right, in a free society.

Miguel A. Faria Jr., M.D., is editor emeritus of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, formerly Medical Sentinel of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons and author of "Vandals at the Gates of Medicine," "Medical Warrior: Fighting Corporate Socialized Medicine," and "Cuba in Revolution – Escape From a Lost Paradise."

Swellin · 10-25-2003, 08:23 PM

Just another thought for you...

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." Mahatma Gandhi (Gandhi's Autobiography, page 446)