Remember Kitty Genovese? For those of you too young to remember events in 1964, she was attacked by a man with a knife as she arrived home very early one morning from work. Her screams attracted the attention of neighbors, who did not intervene.
The received lesson is that the neighbors were callous to not get involved. I blame the Sullivan Act.♠
Now we have a man murdered for intervening to stop a fight in a line at a McDonald's in Brixton (South London). From The Daily Mail we have this report of the incident.
The basic outline is that a Mr Raymond Mitchell, 34, stepped in to stop a fight in a line at the fast food joint and one of those fighting told him he would be dead by morning. As he stepped out of the establishment he was chased into a dead end, where he was pistol whipped and then shot three times.
Of course, the question is, with the UK's strict gun laws, how could that possibly happen? Gun control laws are supposed to stop this kind of thing. I think that perhaps Mr Mitchell forgot he was in England when he stepped in to stop a fight. The people who didn't rush into the streets when Kitty Genovese was being stabbed and then raped were not stupid. On the other hand, if one of them had opened a window and brandished a handgun, a 75 year old Kitty Genovese might be walking around this very Easter Weekend, a proud Grandmother.
Regards — Cliff
Hat tip to Matt Drudge.
PS: For those wondering what I meant by "Leading to the Next Post" as the title of a recent post, this was the post that was supposed to immediately follow.
♠ It's the "Sullivan Act". You have no right to a real link. It is a "may issue" act. I have "discretion" and I judge you may not be safe with an actual link.
1 comment:
Strict gun laws only disarm law abiding citizens. If you are a criminal, you can always get a gun. It is one of the enduring failures of logic in modern times. Put another way, a citizenry who are prevented from arming themselves are called subjects....to a government...to a criminal element.....you name it.
People who are law abiding citizens do not employ their weapons except in self defense. Criminals employ their weapons in OFFENSE.
Vermont has almost zero restrictions on the personal ownership and use of firearms....and also has one of the lowest violent crime rates in the country. Why? Because criminals don't want to take a chance on have THEIR force met with equal force.
The current liberal mania with disarming the public being articulated by the Obama administration may well prove to be the most contentious, unenforceable policy or law ever promulgated in the history of American government.
Post a Comment