Friday, April 19, 2013

Something To Think About...

Right now, as I write this, the streets of Boston are empty. On a Friday afternoon - a beautiful day in the high 60s/low 70s - the city should be just filled with life; instead it looks like something out of a zombie apocalypse movie. Police officers in armored cars roam the streets with automatic weapons, and Blackhawk helicopters search overhead, all for a person suspected of an act of terrorism and the death of an MIT police officer.

And yet I cannot buy a new Glock or a standard capacity magazine.

If things are so dangerous out there that we need attack* Army helicopters patrolling our skies, then I should be able to buy a 15-round magazine for my M&P, don't you think? If one person - one person - is so dangerous that people are being told to stay in their houses, businesses are closed, posse comitatus has fallen by the wayside, etc. - how can anyone tell me I shouldn't own an AR-15?

Because of one person - one group, even - an entire city has been brought to a standstill. Its citizens - by and large disarmed by fiat - are left helpless as the police hunt for a killer. Families are told to stay inside; workers are told not to come to work; businesses are told not to open. It is so dangerous because of this person; yet people will be denied a license to carry a firearm in the state of Massachusetts today.

They won't explore how these two immigrant brothers acquired firearms - handguns, even - in one of the most restrictive states for gun ownership. Mumbles might claim that they came from out of state, but the fact remains that both state and federal laws (if they got the guns out of state) failed - so let's add more laws! We need universal background checks so ineligible people don't break more gun laws while they're breaking gun laws.

And excuse me, but the fact that Army helicopters are flying over my city is every reason in the world for me to own an AR-15 - and it's EXACTLY the reason for the Second Amendment.

That is all.

*Thanks to McThag for pointing out a salient point. The Blackhawk is not set up as an "attack" helicopter.

21 comments:

Nylarthotep said...

I predict that Mumbles will blame NH for all the supplies that the bombers used. He doesn't need facts. He has his emotional belief and that's all that he needs to make a righteous if false statement.

Butch Cassidy said...

Bitter coincidence that the barrel for my AR ships, today?

Also, there are signs on the southbound roads in Northern NH to avoid the Boston area and check the media. I feel bad for the vacationing families who can't return home.

Anonymous said...

yup,the answer is more bullets! Amaze's me that with all those cops making it sound like viet nam,that only 1 was shot.And I still haven't heard that they were armed.

Angus McThag said...

Unless it's Cobras or Apaches you don't have attack helos buzzing around.

This is the same quibble that calls a Bradley a tank.

If we're going to complain about the media getting assault rifle wrong we have to make sure we don't get other basic terminology right.

LC Scotty said...

"I should be able to buy a 15-round magazine for my M&P"

Beware the scourge of the over-engineered PEZ dispenser...

Rifleman762 said...

I don't think we need to worry about what Mumbles is gonna say as much as we need to worry about Deval. Menino is all about the resilience and unity of Boston right now (although his MAIG involvement might take hold later on). Deval Patrick, on the other hand, will use this to justify his 1/month bill and further state gun control legislation.

Right now, I'm just sorry for the MIT officer's family, the transit police officer who is in critical condition, and the people in Watertown who are still facing an imminent threat of danger. Let's hope this gets resolved ASAP without further loss of life (perpetrator excepted).

Jake (formerly Riposte3) said...

"If we're going to complain about the media getting assault rifle wrong we have to make sure we don't get other basic terminology right."

Under the same quibble, I expect the soldiers and helos are National Guard units, not US Army. If I understand it correctly, posse comitatus doesn't apply to the Guard unless they've been called up by the FedGov.

I can't disagree with anything else, though. Including the statement that "the fact that [military] helicopters are flying over my city is every reason in the world for me to own an AR-15 - and it's EXACTLY the reason for the Second Amendment."

Anonymous said...

My question is regarding the "lock-down:" If you needed to get something from the store i.e. cold medicine and you take your concealed carry with you for proper protection. What are your legal rights if confronted by law enforcement in a situation like this?

Thank you.
TB

Eck! said...

jay,

Yep, wolf on the loose and the "people in control" have asked (or frightend) the sheep indoors.

It would seem to me that is everyone were armed it would be a more socially unpleasant place to be in if you had just bombed a popular event or shot at police.

Gov Patrick has already made noises about guns since the bombing. More laws don't help.

Eck!

Old Windways said...

FYI, MIT Police are armed. I don't know if the deceased officer had the opportunity to return fire, but he certainly had the capability.

Geodkyt said...

Jake -- Even if they are Guardsmen, their uniforms still say "US Army". Guardsmen are merely federal Reservists the governor can borrow if POTUS isn't using them.

However, I suspect these guys are being paid for with federal dollars; not only does (IIRC) posse comitatus work differently when terrorism is officially invoked, and with the National Guard, but Obama likely approved federal payment under an emergency request by the governor.

Anonymous said...

"Lockdown" is just the politically correct term for martial law.

Let's see if any of the media brings it up after this is all over

tjbbpgobIII said...

Looks like they've got one cornored in a boat in a backyard somewhere in Watertown and are waiting for him to bleed out therefore saving the state the cost of a trial and the feds another bunk in Cuba.

acairfearann said...

I have to admit to being of two minds on this sort of thing.
On one hand, it is a hall-mark of a by and large civil society that when a 'clear and present' danger is sighted that the sheep, and let us not delude ourselves into thinking that the majority of people are not going to be sheep and indeed Want to be sheep, get out of the way. Speaking only for myself, I know my 'sheep' qualities are just as strong if not stronger than my 'guard dog' qualities. In a broad view this is a positive, it theoretically allows the sheep to focus on other things.

However. It then falls upon the assigned guard dogs to not overstate the 'clear and present' danger. That is a great deal of easily abused trust and, I think, where the problem lies. Our guard dogs are screaming 'Wolf!!!' at the sight of every chipmunk. The trait that makes the sheep get out of the way of the guard dog to deal with the wolf is the trait that makes it easy to herd the sheep on to the slaughter truck.

It would be terribly easy to use the pretext of danger to install martial law. It does not take long, weeks at the most, to break down and begin to reshape people's social networks, behaviours, and attitudes towards authority. The former Soviet bloc gives interesting lessons on how this can be achieved, especially in Ukraine. Yet, it would at times (I do not think this is necessarily one of them) be socially irresponsible to ignore the authority's requests.

After all, We've all seen the idiot on a hurricane lashed beach ignoring the closure signs, and at least most of us feel that the moral thing for the poor guard dog (who has often agreed to be a guard dog) to do is to go collect the idiot at a risk to themselves.

How does one decide? Where is the line? When do you Know it is the line?

Mikael said...

Read it in the swedish news that suspect #2 is now in custody(found hiding in a boat in a backyard), though they're also saying that it's suspected the two brothers had another accomplice.

PJS said...

acairfearann writes "It would be terribly easy to use the pretext of danger to install martial law. It does not take long, weeks at the most, to break down and begin to reshape people's social networks, behaviours, and attitudes towards authority."

Exactly. The slippery slope . . .

Anonymous said...

Was talking over the Boston lockdown with some co-workers this afternoon. The consensus was:

1) WTF is going on, that an entire city just rolls over and accepts martial law being declared over one fugitive?

(Followed by the mutual realization that this was Boston, suffering under MA's draconian gun laws and other blue-state nonsense. Had this been KC, OKC or Dallas, odds are the guy who owned the boat the surviving Chechen Chicken Choker picked for a hiding place, would have just potted the guy with a .30-06 and THEN called the cops. ;) )

And 2) What happens when Al Qaeda or some other batch of extremists - foreign or domestic, it doesn't matter; they're all taking notes - decides to unleash ten or a dozen whackjobs in as many cities?

I've seen estimates that shutting Boston down for the day cost the city something on the order of $300 million dollars in lost revenue, exclusive of all the overtime the cops racked up during the course of the manhunt for the Chechen Chicken Chokers. Now multiply that number by five, or ten, or more...

--Wes S.

Anonymous said...

California just passed a law to confiscate guns!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Really,more bullets make you safer?? More bullets equal more bad guys? If you have them,they do too! The Gabby gifford shooting,the clown had a 30 rd in a glock..Go to the website and look at that joke! It's twice the size of the gun!!
If you support the 2nd amendment,get a flintlock,or shut up

Ed said...

Economic cost of shutdown of Boston metro area Friday is estimated to be $250 - $333 Million per day!!!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/04/19/the-entire-city-of-boston-has-shut-down-how-much-will-this-cost/

TigerStripe said...

"If you support the 2nd amendment,get a flintlock,or shut up"

Go buy a printing press to respond to any comments on blogs with which you disagree. By your logic you only have speech or a printed page that is protected under the Constitution. The Founding Father couldn't imagine that radio, TV, e-books, email, the rest of the internet in 1789-1791.