June 20, 2007


When, exactly, did the Goblins become so fearless? From whence sprung the notion that actions have no consequences? To the point; when and why did criminals seem to lose that restraint which should be imposed upon them by example? Our court system has failed to successfully prosecute too many miscreants. Our judges have failed to make sure that repeat offenders do not soon appear back on the street. Our Law Enforcement Officers are losing the will to act aggressively for fear of repercussions from their own departments and our Citizens are sometimes prosecuted for defending themselves by force of arms.
Is society failing in it's chief obligation, which is the safeguarding of the lives and property of it's members? Society is, and that means we as individuals are failing as well. What is society but a collection of individuals? Too many have decided that they are not at risk from ourselves, or our institutions, and have become predators.
In the past, crime was largely motivated by avarice or hunger. That is no longer true today. The criminal class has been encouraged to prey on society by those who should know better. In short, they have been taught that crime actually pays rather well, and that they are not really engaging in criminal acts so much as they are redressing social ills such as income inequality, racism, intolerance, and a lack of "Cultural Respect". Incredible as it seems, we have taught them that it is O.K. to perpetrate all manner of violence upon society in the name of egalitarianism. Crime today is largely driven by envy and permissiveness. When a gang of predators gathers in front of the drug store and asks all who would gain entry"Excuse me, but can you spare $10.00?" it is more like a shake down than a request for charity. Do you think they will be grateful for the money? They will not be. Like dogs, they have scented fear and they are more likely to attack. It is only a small progression to "Give me all your money, NOW!". As a notorious German Statesman remarked after Munich in 1938 "I have seen our enemies and they are worms.". Those are the fruits of appeasement.
"But wait" you exclaim" I am no appeaser".Quite probably, you are. Whenever you fail to uphold civilised norms of behavior you are in full appeasement mode. When you give the squeegee guy a buck to go away and leave you alone, you are in appeasement mode. When you tolerate gang behavior and run to hide in your crackerbox, you are in full appeasement mode. When you allow yourself to be harangued by some whacko that wants to change your diet, or clothing, or mode of transport, you are in appeasement mode. Don't worry though, for you are not alone.
The failure to take action against outrageous behavior is something that permeates our society these days. The inability to judge right from wrong, or the fear to do anything about it invariably leads to the same destination. The bad guys have already gotten the message. They own the streets and no longer fear the courts. This is the society of fear and confusion that we have built.
Jeff Cooper called it "The age of the Common Man"
It was not a generous assessment.
We must do much, much, better than that. Our lives shall depend upon it.

June 12, 2007

Armed Citizens

I've recently received some curious emails from people expressing a reluctance to aid another citizen in need. The pith of the argument seems to be that when the situation demands recourse to law enforcement or rescue services, a prudent person should make himself scarce rather than get involved. No one in his right mind wants to be a witness stuck in the middle of an official investigation. Who wants to take a chance on being found culpable for damages after a good faith effort on behalf of another citizen? After all, the world's best lawyer is the one who doesn't know I exist. Each of these is a fair and reasonable attitude if one considers only his own self-interest. Philosophers and economists have all acknowledged that self-interest is vital to the well-being of an individual. But the idea does not exempt a citizen from duty. The obligations of a citizen to the entire polity, and the reciprocal duties by his fellow citizens to him, provide the foundation for civil society. At times we are called to act, despite self-interest, because our obligation to the community demands it.
The duty of a citizen to provide for the collective defense of his community is enshrined in the United States Constitution. More commonly, we call it the Second Amendment. Notice that my reading of this amendment infers an obligation that walks hand-in-hand with the right of individual citizens to possess a firearm. Look closely at the wording: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The word "militia" defines a body of ordinary citizens with an obligation to provide for the common defense. The wording does not abrogate individual rights, but your right to own a firearm is predicated on your duty to defend the community. You may not be part of a standing militia when circumstances require you to react against armed aggression or ordinary criminality, but that does not absolve you of your obligation to respond. You must act because that is the duty of a free citizen. Sometimes the use of deadly force is not just an imperative, it is the morally obligatory course of action. In the case of a criminal killer, the only sure way to stop more killing is to kill or incapacitate the perpetrator by any means possible. Those with the training and wherewithal are obliged to stop the assault at the point of attack. And the character of the victim is of no consideration because it's society as a whole that has come under attack. So why all the second thoughts about consequences? The question is rhetorical.
It's a sad day when citizens stand in fear of what lawyers might do. The legal profession is full of prostitutes who regularly obstruct justice for financial gain. Their rhetorical skill will turn white to black, and black to white in front of people carefully screened because they lack the requisite discrimination and judgment to sit on a jury. Justice has become a travesty. But does it make you any less right if you lose the case to clever sophistry before a jury of morons? The founding fathers pledged everything they had for freedom, including their sacred honor. They swore to create a new nation based on inalienable principles, or hang as traitors. Now that, my brothers, is a pledge worthy of emulation. Should we adopt some lesser attitude? Not if we hold honor as a sacred virtue.
Men of worth must step forward and do always what is morally right. It's not enough to profess the truth; we are sometimes obliged to act in the common defense of our community to defend that which we hold dear. Stand forth and deliver the service you know is right. Give aid when the situation demands it, and damn the consequences. The obligations of citizenship include duty, sacrifice, and courage. See you to it, brothers and sisters, and carry on in confidence.

June 03, 2007

The Red Zone

12:45 PM
The man with the Kalashnikov walks through the front door of the bar and begins firing. He does not say a word. Starting with the booth closest to the door, he methodically fires single rounds through the bodies of the still seated customers.To the right of the shooter, a long bar covers most of the wall. On the opposite wall there are about a dozen booths filled with customers. There are two doors, the front from whence appeared the shooter and a rear door near the opposite end of the bar.
YOU! are seated in the very last booth. You have your chosen carry piece with you and you have a concealed weapons permit for this jurisdiction.
What do YOU do?
This is the "Bar Scenario" from the Internet site "The Red Zone". Shooters are invited to send their "Tactical Solutions" to a message board where they will be critiqued. About 20 persons responded. Nineteen of them proposed some variation of "shoot the bad guy". One headed out the back door. The moderator stated that he had never banned anyone from his site before, but that this craven act required him to do so now.
Our "out the back door man" replied that his choice was not cowardly, but extremely rational. He stated that he had a wife and four daughters aged 3 to fifteen. He also stated that he ran his own business and employed twelve other people who also had families. He had scores of business and other financial obligations. He stated that it would be insane for him to try and pull his pistol out and duel with an obviously well trained adversary who also had him outgunned(Assault rifle with thirty rounds vs. a pistol with eight). He also stated that he had exactly zero obligation to try to save any other persons inside the bar at that time, but would have headed for the nearest phone and called 911.
Let me ask again. What would YOU do?
The first rule of a gunfight is"Always Cheat-Always!" The second rule is-put as much distance as possible between yourself and your adversary! Distance is your friend. The third rule is-the last place you ever want to be is in a gunfight! It is true that the late Col. Cooper (pictured above) advised that "It is our job to make the Goblins fear us!", but I learned The Three Rules from him as well. Really, he was correct that the most important thing in a lethal confrontation is not the weapon nor the tactics employed but the Mind-Set of the combatant. We fight as we train.We should train as we fight. If you have ever been frightened by this type of nightmare by all means arm yourself, but take a combat pistol course before you go out and play "Dirty Harry". It could save your life.
The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted. — D.H. Lawrence