|
|
Post by moondog on Dec 1, 2008 13:59:56 GMT -5
As I sat and watched the events in Mumbai unfold, I was wondering how it could occur in a place where they had to be watching out for such things. What prevented this country, India, from subduing it's invaders and killing them on the spot?
Well, I have come to find the answer on the way to work this fine morning.
Gun Control.
Not even the guards are armed. This struck me as odd. I have been to many nations and those I found to be the safest were heavily armed against such things. I find comfort in knowing that the hotels I stay at abroad are protected by armed guards.
I find even more comfort in my country, knowing that citizens would be fighting such people in the street, only because we are well armed. However, given the attitude of some in this nation, I see a day approaching when our citizens will be part of a shooting gallery, just like the one in Mumbai. All for one simple reason. The government, and many of our esteemed citizens, do not trust the armed people of this great nation.
That is too bad. For when Mumbai comes to the streets of San Francisco, New York, Boston or Atlanta, no one will be safe. This is a dangerous world, which is made more perilous with the irrational fear of guns that will strip some of us of our right to protect ourselves from such insurgencies.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Dec 1, 2008 16:42:03 GMT -5
Even armed police officers were reported outside some of the locations not returning fire, even though there were terrorists in the open and targetable. Here is one story on point. It's also been reported that many of the railway policemen in the train station that was attacked were unarmed save for the split bamboo batons they normally carry. Needless to say that the carnage at the train station was large. Bear in mind also that the average street policeman in Mumbai is likely not trained even close to what the average street policeman here is. They certainly were not or are not trained in anti-terrorist response in an active shooter(s) situation so when the SHTF they did what they were trained to, which was nothing. In our largest cities, such as New York, Chicago and Los Angeles, the law enforcement response to such a situation would be massive, well trained and reasonably well coordinated. Those largest cities have enough resources and people power that they can keep heavily armed and well trained teams on duty 24/7/365. Medium sized cities such as San Francisco or Oakland, which have plenty of attractive targets in them, are not as fortunate in terms of resources nor does the political (correct) landscape support it. Those are where I would expect Mumbai type attacks. And since the City & County of San Francisco doesn't want anyone to have a means to defend themselves or their home, it makes it all the more perfect a target for the bad guys. |
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Dec 1, 2008 17:49:36 GMT -5
Very, very good response sir. One can only hope that the people here, not the leaders but the people, were actually paying attention to Mumbai and not saying to themselves, "it could never happen here."
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Dec 1, 2008 19:30:07 GMT -5
It can happen here... and it will.
Some, including me, would say it already has. The mall shooting in Utah a year or two back was by a young Muslim. It was spun as just another nutjob, but one might conclude otherwise by digging into it deeper.
|
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Dec 1, 2008 19:44:04 GMT -5
It can happen here... and it will. Some, including me, would say it already has. The mall shooting in Utah a year or two back was by a young Muslim. It was spun as just another nutjob, but one might conclude otherwise by digging into it deeper. Interesting point. I am going to dig into that as well. |
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Dec 2, 2008 20:22:49 GMT -5
Found this on another forum: "The photographer at the newspaper across the street from one of the hotels in Mumbai, India was interviewed this morning. He had a ringside seat to the terrorist attack and a clear view of many of the terrorists. He is quoted as saying "I wish I'd had a gun instead of a camera. I could have done something."
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Dec 3, 2008 0:54:10 GMT -5
That photographer is the subject of the article I linked in my first reply above.
There are wolves, sheep and sheepdogs. Methinks that humble photo guy might qualify as at least an honorary sheepdog.
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Dec 3, 2008 8:01:14 GMT -5
Sorry, I missed seeing that link.
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Dec 3, 2008 11:58:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Dec 3, 2008 12:37:03 GMT -5
Sorry, I missed seeing that link. No worries.... just wanted to make sure anyone looking for the full story wouldn't have to go search it down. It is a compelling argument.  |
|
|
|
Post by moondog on Dec 3, 2008 12:42:38 GMT -5
I love the quote by the PC police chief. Chief Dan Isom told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch he understands Troupe's frustration but doesn't support citizens arming themselves.
Carrying guns, he said, is not a "recipe for a less violent community."
I say, "No dip-shit, it is recipe for saving your ass."
|
|
