That’s pretty bad.
Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble. That’s right.
ABC News reports:
“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.”
“Ask yourself: If that was Denver, Col., if that was Texas, would those guys have been able to spend hours, days, shooting people randomly?”
“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.”
I think he has identified the issue. What do you think?
What follows are my comments in a discussion elsewhere. Instead of being bound by the confines of that specific discussion I wanted the freedom to explore the question on my own. And this is an exploration. I am not wondering about these things, I really think them, but I am not settled immovably and welcome an honest discussion.
The discussion was started by the following quote and graphic:
The core of the quote at the top is using the state’s monopoly on violence to coerce people into funding actions that some people deem compassionate. There are two issues there. First, there is the coercive, involuntary collection of taxes. The second, is the “compassionate” actions. Taking them in order, there is no way around the fact that taxes are extortion. The state threatens force if you do not pay. They justify the demand saying it’s for important things like the military and police which protect you. If you don’t pay they come and wreck your stuff. It sounds like a classic collection racket. No, it is extortion and that’s the end of it.
I often get folks who become upset with this and say that the police and roads are in fact necessary. Be that as it may, it has no bearing on the fact that taxes are extortion. However, it does logically lead to the question, “If taxes are extortion, are they necessary?” Previously in this thread libertarians (or perhaps Libertarians, I’m not inclined to look) were characterized as idealists akin to true communists. This is not an accurate characterization. The true idealists are the Anarchists.
To be continued.
“We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home.”
Sage words from Edward R Murrow.
We look back and think, “Those silly so and sos. That McCarthy was messed up and a bad egg.” The scary thing about McCarthy was that he had authority. That is scary because authority is given to you, unlike power. The people gave him that authority. “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars but in ourselves.”
Our actions as a nation have given considerable comfort to our enemies. It is not Obama’s fault. To paraphrase a good friend of mine, Obama did not spring fully formed from the head of the Democrat party. He only does, the Reublicrats only do, what we let them.
We let them because we are afraid. In response to those who are afraid I reiterate the following:
We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep into our own history and our doctrine and remember that we are not descended from fearful men
And we should remember how much Murrow was putting it out there and laying it on the line by broadcasting this.