the auroran sunset diary
[Recent Entries][Archive][Friends][User Info]

[main site] [f.a.q.] [blog roll + ...]

Below are the 3 most recent journal entries recorded in the "the auroran sunset" journal:


Tuesday, February 21st, 2006
03:51 pm
[User Picture] height=
the legitimacy of the police
the british police are well-known for avoiding doing their job if there is any chance that they might have to confront actual criminals, as opposed to docile middle-class sheep who might have been speeding。 it is well-known that the police delay arriving on the scene of crimes until after they can reasonably expect the criminals to be gone, then say "there's nothing we can do"。 all the while they do all they can to harrass those that attempt to protect themselves independently。

apparently it is not just the british police:
George Phillips of Meridian, Mississippi was going up to bed, when his wife told him that he'd left the light on in the garden shed, which she could see from the bedroom window. George opened the back door to go turn off the light, but saw that there were people in the shed stealing things.

He phoned the police, who asked "Is someone in your house?" and he said "no". Then they said that all patrols were busy, and that he should simply lock his door and an officer would be along when available. George said, "Okay," hung up, counted to 30, and phoned the police again.

"Hello, I just called you a few seconds ago because there were people in my shed. Well, you don't have to worry about them now cause I've just shot them all." Then he hung up.

Within five minutes three police cars, an Armed Response unit, and an ambulance showed up at the Phillips residence and caught the burglars red-handed. One of the Policemen said to George: "I thought you said that you'd shot them!" George said, "I thought you said there was nobody available!"
i'm surprised that the police bothered with the burglars when they had such a dangerous criminal to deal with。 there is only one reasonable response to this sort of behaviour:
The British police are showing they will not defend the society.
So why pay them? Where is their legitimacy?

The British government makes excuses. Why pay them?

A weak government with no respect for law, or even for the enforcing of law, allows a vacuum of power to form.

The British government is starting to use a pretence of law to undermine the law.

People call publicly for murder, and the police protect them.
People call publicly for murder and the government makes illegitimate ‘laws’ to enforce the demands of the murderers.
A person defends themselves against the violent, and the police charge them with violence.

Britain no longer has legitimate government or legitimate law.
if the police or the government refuses to defend you, they lose any right to tell how you may or may not defend yourself。

Current Mood: tired
Current Music: Kate Bush - Cloudbusting

[permanent link] (shoot the breeze)



Friday, December 2nd, 2005
03:55 pm
[User Picture] height=
more from the disarm the victims brigade
frank j has posted part three
That people who own guns out of a fear of crime are paranoid, but people who don’t want other people to own guns in case it causes them to commit crimes are rational.

That crime is higher in urban areas with less guns, and we must continue to disarm the minorities in these areas because of the risk of crime, and that isn’t bigotry.

That trigger locks and other devices make guns safer, which is why the police and military refuse to use them.

That owning a gun for self-defense indicates an intent to kill, just like owning a first aid kit indicates an intent to impersonate a physician.

That making it harder and harder for even cops to have guns on school property will somehow make it harder for lunatics to kill the utterly helpless students.

That people with large gun collections are dangerous, especially if they have more than two hands to shoot with.

here is the previous lot

Current Mood: tired
Current Music: [none]

[permanent link] (shoot the breeze)



Saturday, November 26th, 2005
08:06 pm
[User Picture] height=
mocking the disarm-the-victims brigade
frank j has copied out some pointed takedowns of the arguments used by anti-other-people-owing-guns nuts。 it is done in humorous style as short parodied beliefs:
That gun control works, which is why there are no illegal weapons in Northern Ireland or Beirut.

That the Second Amendment only applies to flintlocks, just as the First Amendment only applies to quills and lead type.

That rather than have the pilot risk human life by shooting at a hijacker, we should simply have the Air Force shoot down the plane, thus preserving life.

That rapists prefer to attack armed women so they can take the guns and use them against the victims.

That 1 firearm owner in 10,000 will commit an act of violence in his or her lifetime, and this is far more frightening than the 25% of drivers who will cause a serious or fatal accident.

That you should rely on police in lieu of your gun, just as you should rely on a dentist in lieu of your toothbrush.

That car keys, umbrellas and hairspray are good tools for self-defense, despite the fact that police continue to carry guns.

That Washington DC’s low murder rate of 80.6 per 100,000 is due to strict gun control, but Arlington, Virginia’s high murder rate of 1.6 per 100,000 is attributable to the lack of gun control.

That NASA, the military, physiologists, anatomists and trainers all agree and Olympic scores confirm that men on average have tremendously more upper body strength than women, but women should try to defend themselves with martial arts and not a gun.

That less guns in an altercation is a good thing, so you should not be armed against a criminal to keep yourself safe.

That rather than spend a few hundred dollars on a firearm and an afternoon learning how to use it, one should instead spend thousands of dollars and several years learning a martial art, so you’ll be well-prepared to fight anyone, as long as they’re in your gender division and weight class.

That the “Reasonable” uses for guns are hunting and target shooting, but not self-defense. In other words, it’s acceptable to use them as toys but not as lifesaving devices.

That one has the moral obligation to make a citizen’s arrest when one sees a felony in progress, and that it should be accomplished by yelling at the perpetrator, “Stop! Or I’ll yell ‘stop’ again!” rather than by drawing a weapon.

That a gun is merely an inadequate substitute for a penis, so when attacked by a mugger one should pull out a...

That if honest people give up their weapons, the criminals and dictators will give up theirs, as Chicago street gangs and Hitler have demonstrated.

That only the government should control guns, just as only the government should control broadcasting, and only the government should control religion.

there is *much* more at the link and that is apparently only part one! ah, here's part two
That an intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .44 Magnum will get angry over your retaliation and kill you.


for part three see here

Current Mood: tired
Current Music: Del Shannon - Runaround Sue

[permanent link] (4 zephyrs | shoot the breeze)


yraid tesnus narorua eht