Interpol: backs concealed carry

[Johnny_B_Goode]

Gun owners around the world are actually being recognized as a deterrent to crime by the most unlikely of sources, Interpol. Interpol has concluded that the only way to stop terrorist attacks is by eliminating gun free zones. Enough of my opinion read the report released by Interpol. This was actually report by ABC news. I doubt that this report will make the evening news.
________________________________________________________________

Interpol: allowing citizens to carry guns in public is most effective way to prevent terror attacks.

How long would the jihadis at Charlie Hebdo, Westgate, Mumbai – and many other terror attacks to come – be able to continue killing if they were surrounded by armed citizens? Interpol states that the only way to stop such attacks is to allow citizens to carry arms (the only alternative to an armed citizenry is “extraordinary security” surrounding every area where many people meet – train stations, super markets, schools, etc. – which is of course completely unrealistic). If guns are illegal, only violent criminals, fanatic jihadis and our over-worked, understaffed police will have them.

In case you are unsure whether it is a good idea that citizens legally own firearms: Switzerland has very liberal gun laws and one of the lowest percentages of homicide in the world. Interesting statistics on guns, homicides and firearm related accidents in the US here.

Here is the link I originall spotted.
http://10news.dk/interpol-allowing-...most-effective-way-to-prevent-terror-attacks/

The ABC news article
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/exclu...ief-ponders-armed-citizenry/story?id=20637341

 

[guyfromohio]

I agree in total with your post. One should also read up on Switzerland's immigration policies. If you don't love them and they don't love you, you're not welcome to live there.

 

[hso]

This article dates from October of 2013 and is in response to the Westgate Mall, Sept. 21, 2013 attack in Kenya. Also, the Interpol Secretary General at the time was commenting in an interview to ABC instead of speaking officially on Interpol policy. Mr. Noble finished his term at Interpol Secretary General in 2014.

Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble said today the U.S. and the rest of the democratic world is at a security crossroads in the wake of last month's deadly al-Shabab attack at a shopping mall in Nairobi, Kenya – and suggested an answer could be in arming civilians.

In an exclusive interview with ABC News, Noble said there are really only two choices for protecting open societies from attacks like the one on Westgate mall where so-called "soft targets" are hit: either create secure perimeters around the locations or allow civilians to carry their own guns to protect themselves.

We're obliged to be accurate about the information we promulgate and not create false impressions by leaving relevant information out. This was his position in 2012 two months after the terrorist attack in Kenya, not just last week. Still, it is very useful information for us in our arguments that only "good citizens" obey laws stripping us of the means of self defense and the means of defending our homes while the terrorists are not encumbered by the law on anything. We saw this in France just recently where there are very strict laws limiting access to firearms and in a country that does not function on the "innocent until proven guilty" legal system and where the protections against police surveillance are very different from here. In France we saw bloody murder committed by a few throwing the country into near chaos while the citizens were defenseless. We saw this in Australia where the laws on firearms are even more draconian and yet a madman on a watch list was able to take hostages in a chocolate shop and two of the hostages were killed.

 

[Johnny_B_Goode]

This article dates from October of 2013 and is in response to the Westgate Mall, Sept. 21, 2013 attack in Kenya. Also, the Interpol Secretary General at the time was commenting in an interview to ABC instead of speaking officially on Interpol policy. Mr. Noble finished his term at Interpol Secretary General in 2014.



We're obliged to be accurate about the information we promulgate and not create false impressions by leaving relevant information out. This was his position in 2012 two months after the terrorist attack in Kenya, not just last week. Still, it is very useful information for us in our arguments that only "good citizens" obey laws stripping us of the means of self defense and the means of defending our homes while the terrorists are not encumbered by the law on anything. We saw this in France just recently where there are very strict laws limiting access to firearms and in a country that does not function on the "innocent until proven guilty" legal system and where the protections against police surveillance are very different from here. In France we saw bloody murder committed by a few throwing the country into near chaos while the citizens were defenseless. We saw this in Australia where the laws on firearms are even more draconian and yet a madman on a watch list was able to take hostages in a chocolate shop and two of the hostages were killed.

Here is the date the first article I read was published (January 8, 2015 , by Nicolai Sennels). You want to make wild accusations that is your business. But I am not going to allow you to assault my character with your opinion. I didn't even find the original ABC article until I had started the thread. Moreover, I doubt the later attacks did anything but reinforce the Secretary Generals opinion.

 

[Jim K]

Anybody waiting for Obama to endorse that idea? Don't hold your breath.

Jim

 

[Johnny_B_Goode]

Anybody waiting for Obama to endorse that idea? Don't hold your breath.

Jim

The difference is if Obama could get away with it he would classify republican voters as terrorists. Andrrew Cuomo already sees Republicans in NY as terrorists.

 

[hso]

This is a marvelous opportunity and my points were just a clarification on the details, nothing more. Making sure the Antis can't deflect from the core message by picking apart details and calling our facts into question is all we need to do.

The value here is that the recent head of Interpol that served for 3 terms and had been in U.S. BATFE senior management said in a major network interview after the terrorist attack in Kenya that armed citizens were a valuable element in dealing with terrorist threats. Not that we were a problem or that private firearms ownership was a problem, but that he believed that there was real value in armed citizens in protecting the public. That's of great value to our cause and allows us to point to not just this, but an even earlier terrorist attack that had his words been heeded might have had the tiniest chance of reducing the carnage.

 

[flphotog]

This article dates from October of 2013 and is in response to the Westgate Mall, Sept. 21, 2013 attack in Kenya. Also, the Interpol Secretary General at the time was commenting in an interview to ABC instead of speaking officially on Interpol policy. Mr. Noble finished his term at Interpol Secretary General in 2014.



We're obliged to be accurate about the information we promulgate and not create false impressions by leaving relevant information out. This was his position in 2012 two months after the terrorist attack in Kenya, not just last week. Still, it is very useful information for us in our arguments that only "good citizens" obey laws stripping us of the means of self defense and the means of defending our homes while the terrorists are not encumbered by the law on anything. We saw this in France just recently where there are very strict laws limiting access to firearms and in a country that does not function on the "innocent until proven guilty" legal system and where the protections against police surveillance are very different from here. In France we saw bloody murder committed by a few throwing the country into near chaos while the citizens were defenseless. We saw this in Australia where the laws on firearms are even more draconian and yet a madman on a watch list was able to take hostages in a chocolate shop and two of the hostages were killed.

Thought I had read this before, then looked for and found the date. It's even older than I thought. But nothing has ever come of it.

 

[Johnny_B_Goode]

We all know that gun control makes firearms cheaper and easier to get. Iraq and Afghanistan both have been under some form of martial law for decades. Yet it is easier to get military grade weapons than a bag of rice. I am not talking about an AR15. I am talking about fully automatic weapons, ammo by the case and rocket propelled grenades. Once you create a black market for weapons you lose all control of the weapons that come into your homeland. Most people would rather obtain a weapon legally. But if they have to obtain weapons illegally they are going to get the most bang for their buck. They talk about how well gun control works in the UK yet the IRA was able to get weapons that were a match for the British military.

We all know what gun control is about in the US, it is about market control. Police, politicians and realistic thinking citizens know that gun control is going to work almost as well as the war on drugs, except gun control is going to be much more violent. Weapons smugglers are not going to use semi auto weapons or even firearms to defend their interests. If the police are worried about handguns wait until they have to face gang bangers armed with RPG's.

 

[hso]

Talking about gangbangers with RPGs will turn the public completely off.

There's no expectation that U.S. gangs would be interested in anything other than firearms since heavier ordinance wouldn't fit into their business model. Such is the stuff of movies and our goal is to present a reality based view of all firearms use, evil as well as good, to reduce the hyperbole and hysteria instead of adding to it and unreasonably frightening the voting public.

 

[Trent]

We all know that gun control makes firearms cheaper and easier to get. Iraq and Afghanistan both have been under some form of martial law for decades. Yet it is easier to get military grade weapons than a bag of rice. I am not talking about an AR15. I am talking about fully automatic weapons, ammo by the case and rocket propelled grenades. Once you create a black market for weapons you lose all control of the weapons that come into your homeland. Most people would rather obtain a weapon legally. But if they have to obtain weapons illegally they are going to get the most bang for their buck. They talk about how well gun control works in the UK yet the IRA was able to get weapons that were a match for the British military.

We all know what gun control is about in the US, it is about market control. Police, politicians and realistic thinking citizens know that gun control is going to work almost as well as the war on drugs, except gun control is going to be much more violent. Weapons smugglers are not going to use semi auto weapons or even firearms to defend their interests. If the police are worried about handguns wait until they have to face gang bangers armed with RPG's.

Getting "evil military weapons" has never truly been an insurmountable problem. If you want to go play with RPG's you can book a trip to your friendly neighborhood Mogadishu gun bazaar. (Just do try not to get K&R'd, ok?)

US Gangs have no interest in RPG's outside of whatever video game they are playing for entertainment. They can't conceal them. They're really big, hard to store, transport, or get in to play without getting caught. They would have to have a hell of a transportation and smuggling network just to get them in the country - and there would be a lot of risk with no reward in doing so (those channels are better used for them to profit on with drugs to sell for income, after all).

Gangs want small, cheap, disposable handguns. They use the living CRAP out of those. Why? Because their biggest threat to their livelihood isn't a cop in an armored car - no, their biggest enemy is the neighboring drug dealer who wants more turf! And a small concealed handgun is the way to go when they send a lackey out to ambush the neighboring dealer's troops at close range.

We have no "assault weapon" ban in IL or surrounding states - yet the highest gang crime stats of any state in the union with Chicago. What do those street gang members use?? Certainly not PKM's or DShK heavy machineguns, or RPG's.

That's pure fantasy.

There were fewer than *3* murders with rifles - of any type - for the last 15 years on average in IL. Most years only had 1 or 2 murders with rifles.

99.999% of murders here are with handguns, and the vast majority of those was drug/street gang related in a small area of Chicago.

To further mitigate your point - there were TONS of full auto, "dangerous " weapons brought home by troops before 1968, including and ranging from pistols all the way through machineguns, anti-tank rifles, live artillery shells...

How many of those ended up being used for street crime? Has there *ever* been a functional war trophy used in a street crime?

 

[bikerdoc]

Lets not go down the rabbit hole of fantasy.
The Interpol guy said something important for our cause.

 

[Sunray]

Interpol isn't a police force. It's more like a clearing house for information. There's no such thing as an Interpol agent.
"...Has there *ever* been a functional war trophy used in a street crime?..." A DEWAT .50 BMG was used years ago in an armoured truck robbery in Montreal. Brinks, I think. BG's had the gun on a tripod in the back of a van. Drove in front of the Brinks truck and opened the doors. Stick 'em up or else.
"...TONS of full auto, "dangerous " weapons brought home by troops before 1968..." Nope. At least, not legally. The Class 3 stuff started long before 1968.

 

[Walkalong]

wait until they have to face gang bangers armed with RPG's.

Right now that is fantasy here in the states, except for in the movies. Society and the rule of law would have to break down a great deal for that to have even the least bit of merit.

As pointed out, the important part of this is where it was suggested that law abiding citizens who are carrying concealed can be helpful in an attack.

The "what ifs" are a waste of time and get us away from the important part.

 

[HorseSoldier]

We all know that gun control makes firearms cheaper and easier to get. Iraq and Afghanistan both have been under some form of martial law for decades. Yet it is easier to get military grade weapons than a bag of rice. I am not talking about an AR15. I am talking about fully automatic weapons, ammo by the case and rocket propelled grenades. Once you create a black market for weapons you lose all control of the weapons that come into your homeland.

This has nothing to do with firearms laws. It is a symptom of failed states where Rule of Law is non-existent.

In functional nations with functional legal systems, gun control can be much more effective (even if it is in no way absolutely effective at keeping guns out of the hands of persons not authorized to have them, however legally defined).

Until the UK or Japan starts seeing a rash of RPG-related crimes this is not a productive line of argument to use in opposition of gun control.

(And just to clarify -- none of the above should be taken as an endorsement of gun control.)

 

[vamo]

In case you are unsure whether it is a good idea that citizens legally own firearms: Switzerland has very liberal gun laws and one of the lowest percentages of homicide in the world

Actually by US standards swiss gun laws aren't as liberal as many think they are.

 

[HorseSoldier]

And their homicide rate has much more to do with having a largely homogenous, law and order minded culture that access to firearms.

 

[hso]

Anyway, let's get back to the valuable information Johnny_B_Goode has provided and what we can constructively do with it.


It is particularly valuable that Interpol's head for 3 terms said in a network news interview that is documented that private firearms ownership has a valuable role in stopping terrorist attacks. That information alone would make Antis mutter under their breath and slink into the dark.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Anyway, let's get back to the valuable information Johnny_B_Goode has provided and what we can constructively do with it.


It is particularly valuable that Interpol's head for 3 terms said in a network news interview that is documented that private firearms ownership has a valuable role in stopping terrorist attacks. That information alone would make Antis mutter under their breath and slink into the dark.

It SHOULD...but it won't.

What it will more likely result in is antis ignoring or brushing it under the rug so that it never gets any wide-spread exposure to the common citizen.

And when you consider that the comment referenced is in an obscure internet news site and covers an ABC news article that happened a year and a half ago, with no apparent significant follow-up in the mainstream media, I'd have to say they've done a pretty good job of this.

Which means the onus is upon people like us to dig up and present credible records of this event as appropriate.

 

[hso]

antis ignoring or brushing it under the rug so that it never gets any wide-spread exposure to the common citizen.
...

Which means the onus is upon people like us

I believe that's exactly the point. What do WE do with the information? How do WE put it to use? How do WE make more people aware of it? The objective of this forum is to discuss and develop plans to defend/restore the 2A and shooters rights, after all.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

True that!