Britain's "Knife Control" Movement

I have been trying to write this blog for almost a month.  I find it very difficult because of my cognitive bias.  I cannot really wrap my head around the logic of banning knives.  This is what I believe, you guys tell me if I am off-base.  Banning guns in Britain has stopped a great deal of gun murders.  Knife murders have thus replaced gun murders in England.  How is this success?  The murder rate in London is skyrocketing.  I cannot effectively express how irrelevant it is to murder victims whether they were murdered by a knife, a gun, a car bomb or an airplane flying into buildings.

Here is my basic problem with all of this: I was a horrible combat engineer officer in Iraq.  Why?  Because the mission of the combat engineers was to go out and find IEDs (bombs) on the side of roads.  Our job was to go find the bomb.  We created Task Force IED after the first year of the war to defeat the bomb.  We spent tens of billions of dollars to defeat a hot-wired mortar round on the side of the road; that was really, really, really stupid.  But it got a lot of defense contractors a lot of money.  Hunting for bombs is a stupid way to fight a war.  The Israelis have a saying, "Find the bomber, not the bomb."  So, I fought very hard, and was mostly successful, at getting my company of combat engineers out of the bomb-hunting business and into the bomber-hunting business.  We found, captured and/or killed the IED makers.  That reduced the IEDs way more effectively then spending billions of dollars on redesigned combat vehicles that were specifically designed to get hit by street punks with homemade explosives.

Focusing on the defeat of the weapons of war instead of the defeat of the enemy is a sure way to be defeated by the enemy, regardless of his weapons of war.  Bad people commit murders, not inanimate objects.  Britain has been brainwashed into insanity in the last three generations.  They believe that if you take the rocks away from the monkeys, they will stop fighting.  The rocks do not cause the monkeys to fight.  The knives do not cause the Brits to stab.  The guns do not cause the Americans to shoot.  It is the inevitable outcome of a morally relative society that accepts every evil aspect of every culture no matter how barbaric: marrying nine year old girls off to Sheiks, accepting honor killings, killing abortion doctors, ritualistic mutilation of children, et cetera.  Accepting all of it in the name of multiculturalism means your society has adopted absolute moral relativism, and thus cannot--will not, are incapable of--believing that there are just some evil assholes in the world.  People keep getting killed, regardless of the tools used to do it, and the mentally ill politicians in Great Britain are so blinded by their biases that they can't accept the existence of evil.  When you stop believing in the evil that men do, you start ascribing motives to inanimate objects, because your world view will not allow you to accept that some people are gonna be murderers regardless of the inanimate objects.

There are evil people in the world.  They kill innocent people.  They have created incredibly intricate machines, methods and technologies to do it.  But, if you take away all of those things, the monkey can still bash a brain out with a rock.  The only thing that stops an evil person from stabbing you, is you.  There is no law that deters an evil person from being evil.  There is no law that deters a criminal from breaking laws.  The insanity of the left is not its politics, it is the undermining of language; when you create "unwords" through political correctness, idiots lose sight of definitions.  Criminal: one who breaks laws.  It doesn't matter how many laws you pass, LAWS DON'T DETER THOSE WHO BREAK LAWS!!!

Misdemeanors that ban knives, guns, cricket bats, et cetera, do not deter evil assholes willing to commit capital murder.  The lunatics running London and the rest of Great Britain have lost their minds if they believe that is not the case.  Snidely Whiplash was not evil because he had a sinister mustache, and banning his mustache wax would have no effect on his intentions.  Evil is defeated by good men fighting back, not banning evil's choices in how to be evil!

Thanks,
Soule
Easy 6
www.easy6training.com

I am tired of cowards.

I am tired of cowards.  Baby boomer cowards terrified of a war.  Generation X cowards terrified of a fist fight.  Millennial cowards terrified of WORDS.  And now we have David Hogg and his ilk terrified of absolutely EVERYTHING, willing to literally sacrifice liberty for safety.  Everybody focuses on the first part of Franklin's quote, but read the whole thing; we do not DESERVE our liberty if we are willing to give it up out of FEAR.  Our founders believed in a society of the brave in order to be a land of the free.  We cannot be one without the other; our system of government is built on the premise that men would behave as men when confronted with foreign invasion, cattle rustlers, highwaymen, frontier justice or the myriad other violent deaths available in a free, criminal-friendly country founded by men committing treason against the Crown.  I am tired of pacifists who believe violence is never the answer and that violence itself is the most evil thing in the world.  These are the people who get slaughtered.  Ask a survivor of a concentration camp how well non-violence and pacifism worked for their family.  I am tired of Americans trying to sacrifice their own freedom because they are afraid.  A wheelchair bound polio suffering ultra-liberal was less afraid than David Hogg because he recognized that "fear itself" is the truly terrifying condition.  Please grow some courage.

I am tired of the NRA getting into screaming matches with these cowards.  We have to do a better job of being the hyper-rational, not the emotional.  We have to argue not just about the Second Amendment, but about The Constitution as a whole.  We have to be scholars of the whole document and argue not just for one aspect of the Bill of Rights, but also for the entire process contained within the document.  It is the undermining of The Constitution at large that is the real threat to a democratic republic.  We cannot look like lunatics in these arguments, because the deck is stacked against the NRA in every one of these "panel" discussions.  Being emotionally attached to guns will not serve us.  Being the most rational person, the most scholarly person, the least emotional person on a stage is the only way we can demonstrate that it's the cowards terrified of violence who are the truly irrational ones.  Stop yelling about guns and making us look like every redneck caricature to ever appear in The New Yorker, and start calmly explaining the importance of respecting The Constitution in its entirety.  Stop arguing the utility, culture and history of firearms, and stop arguing about tyranny of an oppressive government; big government liberals will never be convinced by that argument.  What they can be convinced of is the utility of Due Process of Law, the utility of the Unreasonable Search and Seizure clause, or the utility of the Freedom of Speech.  Also, the process for amending The Constitution.  There is a movement to repeal the Second Amendment through a Constitutional Amendment, as happened with Prohibition; I think that is wonderful because that is how the process is supposed to work.  Defend the greatest aspect of The Constitution, which is that it CAN be amended.  We will not change the minds of people who are already afraid of everybody with a gun by acting like irrational, deranged gun fetishists who only care about the right to own the object.  Argue about the right to self-defense, not the right to use a gun to defend yourself.  Owning the object should not be what we stand for, we have to stand for all of The Constitution, including the ability to amend any aspect or amendment of it should the super-majority required to do so be assembled.  We have to stand for the entire Bill of Rights, stop competing with liberals in some sort of tit-for-tat duel about which is more important of the first two amendments; they are both equally important, as are all the other creator-given rights protected from the government by our founding document.

Every shouting match we get into plays right into their hands of making us look like unhinged, dangerous rednecks.  Be Constitutional scholars, not gun nuts!  Argue not for the Second Amendment, but for the integrity of The Constitution as a whole, which is truly under threat.  Most importantly of all, argue as the Left's greatest hero did that fear, not violence, is the enemy to be overcome.  I have said it thousands of times: The only thing that defeats terror is COURAGE!

Please share,
Soule
Easy 6