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

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

10News 94 Comments on 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.

From abcNEWS:

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.

“Societies have to think about how they’re going to approach the problem,” Noble said. “One is to say we want an armed citizenry; you can see the reason for that. Another is to say the enclaves are so secure that in order to get into the soft target you’re going to have to pass through extraordinary security.” …

Citing a recent call for al Qaeda “brothers to strike soft targets, to do it in small groups,” Noble said law enforcement is now facing a daunting task.

“How do you protect soft targets? That’s really the challenge. You can’t have armed police forces everywhere,” he told reporters. “It’s Interpol’s view that one way you protect soft targets is you make it more difficult for terrorist to move internationally. So what we’re trying to do is to establish a way for countries … to screen passports, which are a terrorist’s best friend, try to limit terrorists moving from country to country. And also, that we’re able to share more info about suspected terrorists.”

In the interview with ABC News, Noble was more blunt and directed his comments to his home country.

“Ask yourself: If that (Westgate terror attack) was Denver, Col., if that was Texas, would those guys have been able to spend hours, days, shooting people randomly?” Noble said, referring to states with pro-gun traditions. “What I’m saying is it makes police around the world question their views on gun control. It makes citizens question their views on gun control. You have to ask yourself, ‘Is an armed citizenry more necessary now than it was in the past with an evolving threat of terrorism?’ This is something that has to be discussed.'”

Share this:

Related Articles

94 Comments

  1. Dean Walsh January 8, 2015 at

    I’m absolutely sure this is true, and I would feel much better if I could carry a weapon myself. But unfortunately I think that in most countries relaxing gun laws would just be used as an excuse by our puppet governments to create US style military police to brutalize the public with.

    • Fred January 22, 2015 at

      What do you mean “If I could” Your right to carry a weapon is inalienable and granted by god. No mans words on a piece of paper can deny a free man that. I’m lucky enough to live in a county where the government doesn’t attempt to deny me my god given right so we get along. I carry a gun when I choose. Does your government work for you or does it own you???

      • jim bob January 25, 2015 at

        I have chosen to reside in pa., but the people of new jersey, new york, and maryland have liberal elitists that have all but removed the right for average citizens to conceal carry/ open carry.

        • Tio Nico February 2, 2015 at

          which is why I refuse to go to those states. I will not even fly THROUGH those states if the plane actually lands there, as there are numerous instances of their tyrannical police arrexting people for their legally transported firearms. New York City arrest about 350 per year on gun charges at airports as they are passing through.

      • Huntside February 1, 2015 at

        When did God grant you this right? Just curious…………..

        • Tio Nico February 2, 2015 at

          at the same time He gave me breath. And taht right remains mine until He takes away that breath.

          • Kevin Marshfield November 20, 2015 at

            @Tio Nico, you are saying you are right because God says you are right.
            It’s exactly what islamic terrorists say.
            God is always right, ain’t it? That’s true for your God, Hebrew God, Muslim God. If someone builds his “thruth” on God, how a man reasoning can change his mind?

      • Jason November 16, 2015 at

        Youre a fucking idiot mate…….NOT EVERYONE LIVES IN A COUNTRY THAT ALLOWS IT….

        • Heartland Patriot November 17, 2015 at

          YOU are the one who is disarmed…so that would make YOU the idiot.

      • Kristine November 16, 2015 at

        Your God has NOTHING to do with it.

        We have these rights because of our Constitution.

        The more anyone inserts religion into politics, the more you will turn people off to ever listening to you.

        Wake up.

        There is NO place for your religion–or anyone else’s– in American politics. Leave it at home.

        Learn from current events what happens when people use their religion to justify their behavior. THINK.

        • PavePusher November 16, 2015 at

          “We have these rights because of our Constitution.”

          Not quite. Those Rights existed prior to the Constitution, and are completely independent of it. The Constitution merely recognizes that the Rights exist, and sets up restrictions on government from interfering with them. Neither is it an all-encompassing exhaustive list, hence the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

        • George November 16, 2015 at

          The US Constitution “codifies” your natural right to life, it has nothing to do with a specific religion. If you have a right to life then you have a right to defend that life.

        • David November 17, 2015 at

          Kristine, the US constitution does not “grant” rights. Read the federalist papers which were the widely published debates for and against ratification by the states of the constitution. The Framers believed in “natural rights” that were “unalienable,” that is, incapable of being taken away, given away or VOTED away. Some of the framers believed that natural rights were endowed by their creator (god with a small “g”). Foremost among those rights were the freedoms listed in the Bill of Rights. Those first ten amendments were intended as restraint the new central givernment from infringing on those natural rights. The right to keep and bear arms is the right to defend oneself.

          • Edward Eno July 28, 2016 at

            The Declaration Of Independence states in the second paragraph that all men are created equal, and that they have certain rights endowed to them by their Creator (capital C)

            And in the last sentence of this same document they write about having a firm reliance on divine Providence (capital P)

            I believe all of the people (not just some) who signed this document believed in a Creator (capital C as written in the document). The reason I believe this is because I believe they were honorable men and who knew what the document said and by signing it they were saying this is their belief.

            Now I am not saying that they all believed in the Creator of Bible, but they believed in a Creator, and by Capitalizing the word Creator in the document, they are attesting to a Creator whom they believed had some sort of divine nature.

            Fifty-six (56) people signed this document, pledging their Lives, Fortunes, and sacred Honor in support of the document. They did not sign the document lightly, they agreed with it, and many did lose their fortunes, and lives defending the ideas written in it.

        • John November 19, 2015 at

          Respectfully, it’s not religion. No where does it say, Christ, Jesus et al in the Constitution. The founders were indeed Christian, a few devout and the colonies were 95?% Christian. They left religion out of it by design
          It’s a very forward document by today’s standard. For its time, it’s almost hard-to- fathom. It was so dissected It took 20 years (!) of argument to agree on inalienable draft. Emancipation Proclamation was 1776 but Constitution was finally ratified in 1789.
          Please remember it was the 1st case of self sovereign rule in all of human history. A fact not lost on writers.

          To the point, the Constitution/Bill of Rights states literally, These are God given, bestowed by the Creator, Enumerated by this Constitution.
          Free speach, assembly and indeed self defense are indeed natural rights.
          Every human and animal has a natural right to defend it’s self, family and loved ones.
          Aetheism, although known we rare at best back then although Nature is synonymous in this context.
          This is what folks refer to, not religion. It’s no small detail. It also states clearly, this is the law of the land, any and all laws that say anything otherwise, even a detail is totally Null and Void.
          This is why every single federal employee, Janitor to President and every single member of the military cook to general take an non-expiring Oath to “Follow, uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign or domestic” . Only one loyalty allowed.
          A heck of a thing.
          It doesn’t say “interpret, amend or update”
          It’s crystal clear and written in common language even though many founders were lawyers.
          This wasn’t intended offensively in any way.
          I’m clarifying the foundation many comments are based upon, the law of our land.
          Indeed, I agree that Religious beliefs ruin out tries and have been used to justify all kinds of selfish and self seeing behavior that are hurting our country including .violence.
          The majority of fks who comment on the constitution never actually took the 20 minutes required to read it which is a shame to include people who take oaths to it which is amazing.

          • Bernard November 24, 2015 at

            Wow John, you’re about dumb as shit.

            Emancipation Proclamation in 1776?

            — Try 1863…. Maybe you meant the Declaration of Independence…

            Constitution the “first case of self sovereign rule?”

            — Ever hear of the Magna Carta? No? Fuck it, not America, DOESN’T COUNT! # Merica #USAUSAUSA

            The rest of your comment was a mashup of inane babble stolen from Fox n Friends along with words you don’t fully understand how to use.

            TL;DR: John’s angry, mostly due to confusion, but it doesn’t discredit his anger. Let just hope he votes Republican and stays quiet about it. We need votes more than we need spokesmen like John.

          • Gea July 23, 2016 at

            First and Second Amandment of the US Constitution are basis of US freedom of expression and freedom of oppression by tyrants such as Obama and others who are trying to destroy those 2 amendments to protect their Muslim Brothers.

            Islam ITSELF is NOT compatible with the US Constitution and/or the Universal declaration of Human Rights and therefore does not belong to ANY society that respects freedom, justice and human rights of ALL individuals.

        • Edward Eno July 28, 2016 at

          Kristine, our founding fathers brought the Creator, and divine Providence into politics when they put these terms into the Declaration of Independence.

          I don’t know if you have ever read this document, but in the second paragraph the writers and signers agreed that all men are created equal, and have been endowed by their Creator, with certain unalienable rights (which means they can’t be taken away or given away) That among these rights are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

          Like I said I don’t know if you have ever read this document, but if you have not, or if you have but have forgotten what it says, I think you would enjoy reading it. It is a fairly short document.

          My favorite part is the very last sentence which says: “And for the support of this Declaration with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.” Then after this last sentence, 56 people signed the document.

          This is what they believed, and this is what makes up the foundation of the United States of America. Not only did they say these things, but they lived these things, as many of the signers did lose their fortunes. I found it interesting to research (a google search is helpful) what happened to the 56 people that signed this document.

          Five were captured by the British as traitors and tortured before they died.

          Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned.

          Nine of these 56 fought and died from wounds or hardships of the Revolutionary War.

          Two lost their sons serving in the Revolutionary Army, another had two sons captured.

          They believed in a Creator/divine Providence, as evidenced by their signing this document.

      • mary November 16, 2015 at

        “God give right?” Pretty sure God has nothing to do with it!

      • larrie cole November 18, 2015 at

        this is so typical of so called intelgence organizations, they have no intelligence.
        The easiest and most cost effective way to illiminate the muslim threat is to drop them all into the middle east and let them sort it out…
        ban them from travaeling to any western nation, by pentalty of death for any reason.

        Then go on with our peaceful, multicultural life, with out the threat of terrorists, and whiners and complainers, and barbaric monkeys. they are a spieces that has seen its time and like the last 26 versions of humanoids like the cromagdon man should be perged from the planet. This is gods way the fucked up and retarded shall be pergeded with other inadequate species……..the only thing preventing it is our interferance and over breeding…..and that too can be dealt with…..

      • Kjetil November 19, 2015 at

        “Granted by god”?!

        Fucking really? Can’t remember reading “Thou shalt carry a gun, that is your divine right.”

      • Joe November 19, 2015 at

        Which God ? The God of love ? The God who turned the other cheek? The one who forgave Barabbas on the cross? The God who performed miracles to save lives? Did he leave anyone a private message to bear arms…..In my country no-one is allowed to carry arms, not even the police (90 % of the time). Shootings and gun related incidents are practically unheard of….

        • Edward Eno July 28, 2016 at

          Or perhaps the God, that on occasion told his people to kill everything in the camp of the enemy, including: men, women, children, and all the livestock. Or the God who helped David slay Goliath. Or the God who on many occasions led the army of His people to defeat other tribes? Or the God who said He will return one day with an army of Angels? Hmm, which God, which God, which God, it certainly is something to ponder.

          So in your country if the police are not allowed to carry guns 90% of the time. What do they do if there is a person or persons who are terrorists that go on a killing spree. Do your police then have to go somewhere to obtain weapons before they can respond to a situation like that? I would think this would be the case, since they are not allowed to carry guns 90% of the time.

          This is one of the reasons that militias were part of the United States in the beginning. So that if they were needed they had their weapon in their home, and everyone did not have to go to a central location in order to be issued a weapon (which would be time consuming). All men of sound mind over a certain age (I think it was 16) were required to have a weapon in their home them to use in the militia in case they were need, and had to keep it in good condition. I believe those who had a conscientious objection, were not obligated to do so.

    • Bull57 January 25, 2015 at

      Wow, common sense seems to be taking hold. Don’t criticize us in the USA for packen people, we are use to taking care of ourselves without big brother!

    • Kristine November 16, 2015 at

      @Dean Walsh said: “US style military police to brutalize the public with”

      FFS, stop being some laughably gullible and naive. If you have not reached an age of reason then learn this lesson well and never forget it. News isn’t news. It’s entertainment. Which means EVERYTHING is embellished. No one even waits to make sure something is actually a FACT before they report it.

      By the time any FACT is discovered, it’s too late since the sensationalist story has already spread and blindly believed.

      I do not like the police. I’ve met maybe one cop in my life who wasn’t some arrogant tool. However! Your statement is RIDICULOUS.

      We don’t have freakin’ military police and you actually posting that where others would see it just illustrates how incredibly ignorant you are and how you have never bothered to actually do fact-finding or research.

    • PavePusher November 16, 2015 at

      “But unfortunately I think that in most countries relaxing gun laws would just be used as an excuse by our puppet governments to create US style military police to brutalize the public with.”

      If the Citizens are disarmed, the ability to brutalize with impunity already exists.

      And our police are not as bad as the media would have you believe.

    • Tom RKBA November 19, 2015 at

      Your comment makes no sense. An armed population is far harder to brutalize than the fully disarmed one that exists today in most of Europe. The real issue is YOUR populations PERMITTING your govenments to behave badly.

  2. Ephesian January 9, 2015 at

    Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition!

  3. Dave January 9, 2015 at

    A modern firearm in the hands of an honorable man is truly an “equalizer”

    • me January 13, 2015 at

      Yes…let’s perpetuate the stereotype of “guns and God!”
      I’m down with carrying a sidearm. But God has NOTHING to do with my actions. Oh and yes…born and raised in the church. I just feel the is a line…don’t like it? Blame the Methodists.

      • Frank January 15, 2015 at

        Exactly!!! So sick of hearing people try to connect God with guns. It is possible to argue that God would rather see terrorists die than to see good people die. But trying to connect God with one’s own pet issues is silly.

        • Paladin January 26, 2015 at

          If you took the time to actually read the Bible, you might be surprised by what Jesus said to his Disciples about carrying arms…Luke 22:36.

          Also, God given unalienable rights is what most people are referring to when they tie God and Gun Rights together, so it is very much indeed relevant.

          In response to “me”… I think your problem is with the Methodist Church…I feel your pain believe me…

          • Rick November 16, 2015 at

            Paladin,
            You, too, appear to have taken Him too literally. He knew that even two swords would not work against an arresting party. He later rebuked Peter for using a sword. This is the only place where He says to pick up a sword.

        • Tio Nico February 2, 2015 at

          how about rethinking a bit… that good people with the means to restrain evil will restrain evil even by not USING the means to restrain it. About two million times per year in the USA, normal folks with firearms stop or prevent violent crime by introducing their firearms into the situation, and never firing it. So it ain’t a matter of one or the other dying, but the stronger fending off the weaker. And no matter how strong the attacker bent upon evil, a normal person with a firearm is suddenly stronger. And evil is always cowardly, will almost always retreat in the face of danger to itself.

          • asshole June 15, 2016 at

            it only 126 for the last 7 years so quit spreading lies

  4. Davi January 10, 2015 at

    the first peice of common sense I’ve heard in a long time… But there is a long way to go in Australia since john Howard disarmed Australia… Funny thing is though criminals in Australia still get them … Funny that!

  5. Hans January 10, 2015 at

    A muslim in Austria infront of the court:Its normal for are culture to have guns…

  6. Kurt Thurlow January 12, 2015 at

    People it is time to pull heads out of the sand and get on this we need to be able to conceal arms. It is in the best interest of Canada and people we need to protect families and property.

    • Guy January 15, 2015 at

      Agreed. And it’s for all countries, not only Canada.

    • Michael Perchard January 15, 2015 at

      It’s not the sand the anti-gun people need to pull their heads out of.

  7. Peter January 12, 2015 at

    He’s the former SG of Interpol and was succeeded by Jürgen Stock. If he made those statements, they weren’t in his official capacity.

    • foster January 25, 2015 at

      BAHAHAHAHA !

  8. Dustin January 12, 2015 at

    I think this is the best way to control terrorism and to protect our own families! The minute it is passed I will have mine strapped on. It’s about time they see this.

  9. Dak January 13, 2015 at

    This is an old statement made back in Oct 2013. Would be nice to see here in Canada thou.

  10. Ted January 13, 2015 at

    Yeah, right. We see how that works in the US, don’t we? More people die there from firearms-related crimes than from the terrorist attacks around the world. And having untrained civilians bear arms vs. well trained militias is just a tragedy waiting to happen.

    • TotallyPeeved January 14, 2015 at

      Ted, you are either a liar or a fool. Well, probably both. Not to mention a servile pussy.

      • Jim Dejax January 16, 2015 at

        Ted — The answer is soooooooooooo simple — a COMPULSORY course in firearms training beginning in the schools [education] . Teaching — not controlling — responsibilities — NOT rights.

        • Sean Kibler January 17, 2015 at

          If I remember correctly, something South Carolina is putting into place.

      • Candy Smith November 16, 2015 at

        Ted needs to take a shooting class and strap on a .45. As an American I an offended.

    • Regi January 15, 2015 at

      Ted
      most of our violent crime in the US is in large cities that make it virtually impossible for law abiding citizens to own and carry firearms legally. Cities like Chicago, LA, New York, Washington DC.

      Of course they have high crime rates. The criminals are the only ones that own guns there.

      Areas of the US including large cities where almost anyone could be carrying a concealed weapon don’t have these high crime rates.
      also the reporting is skewed for political reasons, they include suicide and law enforcement shootings of criminals.
      There are more people killed in the US every year by hammers and baseball bats than with guns, according to FBI statistics.

      • Dave November 18, 2015 at

        …….”Of course they have high crime rates. The criminals are the only ones that owns guns there”
        Regi,
        I live in Los Angeles County. I also Legally own a handgun. I have paid the state mandated fee for the California Department of Justice Firearm Safety Certificate and passed the test with flying colors with a score of 100%. To purchase my weapon, I had to pay a state sales tax of 9% and withstand a security back ground check in which I successfully passed.
        I, Sir, find it offensive that you would call me a criminal because I live in Los Angeles and own a gun, when in fact the criminal element here have obtained their guns “illegally”. I think what you PROBABLY wanted to write was ” The criminals are the only ones that own ILLEGAL guns there”.
        Regi, I implore you,next time you get a big head of steam and feel a need to post to the Internet for the whole world to read, that you proof read what you are about to send so as not to offend me and my brothers in arms that have went through the system and have satisfied state laws.
        I feel you owe us all an apology for your ignorance in this matter.

    • Sean Kibler January 17, 2015 at

      Why does everyone assume that gun people in the U.S are untrained. A lot of people I know that are armed are either former military or have better training than most police have.

      By the way have you not seen the countless instances where police make mistakes with firearms. I just the other day watched a video of a police officer shooting his own finger off in a gun store because he didn’t follow cardinal firearm safety rules. He could have easily shot someone else in the gun store.

      If you have no competency with firearms than you hardly have any credibility to talk about who is and is not untrained.

      • Mike February 21, 2015 at

        Most of the people who I know carry spend more time at the range than our police officers are required to maintain certification. Interesting statistic; a mass shooting incident stopped by law enforcement or the suicide of the perpetrator tends to have a much higher body count than one stopped by citizen carrying on the scene. When seconds count the police are minutes away.

        • Candy Smith November 16, 2015 at

          I go to the range at least once a week and practice shooting my shotgun.
          I also take a self defense hand gun quarterly. I practice with the hand gun that I open carry with at least every other week. I am not untrained. I am a 52 year old grandmother who will not be seen as a victim. USA.

    • Tio Nico February 2, 2015 at

      don’;t know which left wing liberal rock you found your “statistics” under. Total firearms deaths per year in the USA pale in comparison to the world toll to terrorists. Then, when one calculates in that in the US, half of those deaths are suicides (which would be done by other means if the guns weren’t so available… compare Canada’s suicide rate from all means to that of the USA.. almost identical, but their gun suicide rate is tinuy.. few handguns, so those wantint to end it all find other means). Accidntal deaths due to firearms have fallen to a freaction of the n umbers of 20 years ago, but the number of arms owned by the public have increased at least three fold in the same time. Three times as many guns, a quarter the deaths to guns? Now, for the REAL thriller… take the gun deaths from Chicago, Baltimore, Wasningotn DC, Los Angeles, New York, the five places where gun ownership is near impossible, legally, and the overall rates for the rest of the country all but disappear. A few hundred. Meanwihle some 30,000 per year die of legally prescribed pharmaceuticals taken as directed and under a doctor’s care.

      So, the real mad dog issue is guns? Go and get a life, stop your whinge….

    • Tio Nico February 2, 2015 at

      some stats, per the FBI: police capture, by use of guns, about a quarter as many people as civilians do, and police injure and/or kill about six times as many innocents (by stray rounds) as we civilians do. Are you SURE your insistence upon training is a valid point? The umbers prove otherwise. Also, civilians with our own guns carried in public and in our homes stop about two million violent crimes per year, WITHOUT FIRING A SHOT. You’ve either been reading too m,uch of Mikey Bloomburg, watching too m,uch Hollywood, or smoking something illegal. Requireing formal certified training is an unlawful infringement as a precondition to my right to arms. There are many ways otthe than taking expensive professional training to learn how to safely, accurately, and quickly handle firearms. Setting up a special cadre of “only ones” who are “qualified” to “train” is nothing but a boondoggle. Most states now require such training for new young drivers. No longer can parents or friends teach new drivers how to drive well and safely. And the driving habits of the “products” of these state established and regulated schools is abysmal. The same thing will happen with mandated firearms training. And it is totally unnecessary. Is there a place for formal training? Yea, and I am qualified and do teach rifle marksmanship. To mandate it is a bad idea.

    • dskofstad November 18, 2015 at

      Ted: You are the victim of lying propagandists. The US violent crime rate has been cut in half as states adopted concealed carry laws.

  11. Fred January 13, 2015 at

    Well Ted, it’s pretty obvious that you don’t live in the U.S., judging by your inane statement. I’m a retired Law Enforcement administrator, and I happen to believe the U.S. is a very safe place, mostly due to our ability to be armed. You can’t judge the whole country by what happens in the ghettos of the large cities, since most of the homicides you hear about are gang related. Those “children” are gangbangers, who have chosen a violent way of life.

    An armed citizenry is a polite citizenry. Of course, in any group of people there will be a nut or two, no matter the locale or ethnic makeup. I happen to live in a “shall issue” state, where anyone who isn’t disqualified by a background of lawlessness, or mental instability, SHALL be issued a license to carry a concealable firearm after taking a training class. It works for us. Just don’t believe all you hear and read. Experience it for yourself before making inaccurate judgements.

    • Jeremy January 14, 2015 at

      Well gun death to terror attacks is like comparing death due to lightning strikes to car accidents. Not comparable. That being said Russia has a firearms related death rate of about 13 per 100,000. The US has About 5.2 per 100,000. Russia has very strict gun control. The right to use a firearm in self defense does not exist and the licincing requirements for just the background check alone is close to what the FBI conducts on employees to work in the White House. The Swiss have it the other direction. Every male after 18 is issued by the State a true fully automatic rifle and ammo that they must keep at home. They average 1 homicide with a firearm each year nstion wide. Firearms relayed deaths have less to do with laws than culture.

      In the US 90% of all firearms related deaths are committed by inner city minority youths who have previous criminal histories. Most victims are inner city minority youths involved in criminal activity.Training or responsible ownership has nothing to do with it. It is culture, and motivation. As for this article, it points to a blairing fact. Police cant be everywhere. And those are the places that terrorists and criminals for that matter target. So we can do ine if three things. 1: Turn the country into a police state and have a TSA check point at every buisness and public place. 2: Do nothing. 3: except that people need to take personal responsibility for their own safety until LEOs arrive, allow them the tools to do so, and in the process turn soft targets into hard targets.

      3 isnt crazy. US DoD has been doing it for over a decade overseas and it works.

  12. chris January 13, 2015 at

    The us isnt a problem with guns its improper training with a firearm that kills and violent ppl behind the trigger that kill with a firearm. guns are not the problem its people . Criminals and would be ones will always be able to get a gun and cheap then hurt people in public i believe a course in firearm training would be in order to open carry and special training for consealed carry i believe it would work and yes in any system we r going to have flaws right from the word go but they only get to make the mistake once with a firearm

  13. Mario C. January 13, 2015 at

    Fred, you are completely correct and Ted is certainly showing his ignorance. As a law abiding Canadian gun owner, I pride myself on the proper handing and practice time I put in to ensure that I handle my weapon properly and securely. I whole-heartedly want concealed carry in Canada and firmly believe that it will go a long way to reduce crime. No matter what, criminals will always be armed, why can’t I protect myself? our police forces can’t be everywhere at the same time. Just look at recent world situations, would have armed citizens in Australia, France and Canada a decade ago made a difference?…I believe it would have. Had someone been armed and able to defend themselves, the coffee shop in Australia and grocery store in France might have had a different outcome…
    Although we don’t have the second amendment in Canada, am I not entitled to be able to defend myself?
    …Oh and Ted, as I mentioned above, I would say the legal gun owners in Canada are probably better trained and can shoot more accurately than most police officers. The reason being is that we do this for the love of the sport and practice often, where as some police officers (can’t say for sure how many…) are not as practiced…that’s just my opinion but I would bet I’m right…
    Ted, your lack of knowledge shows your ignorance in the subject, I recommend you go through the process to get your PAL (Possession Acquisition License), even if you don’t ever buy one, you will have a complete change of view.
    All the best!

    • Guy January 15, 2015 at

      You are 100% right. And I can confirm some, if not most, LE officers are a lot less proficient than us enthusiasts. I’ve seen some of them training at my club. I’m a very average shooter barely getting 2 inches grouping at 15 yards with a .45 hand gun. Yeah, I know, nothing impressive here. But that’s 45 feet! And they can’t even do that. Most targets of them I’ve seen at that distance group at 1 foot (yes 1 foot, not inches). That is scary! Even more scary is that hey shoot 9mm. Lots less recoil on 9mm than .45ACP. At 15 yards with a 9mm, I group 1 inch or less. What’s with them? These guys need practice. Lots of it.

      • Sean Kibler January 17, 2015 at

        I think a lot of it is probably that, for us its a labor of love, for them its a job and department funds are always stressed. Not making an excuse, there is no excuse, rather pointing out my idea of how I think this happens.

        Just watched a video of a police officer in a gun store shoot his finger off after muzzling everyone in the gun store with a loaded gun because neither the clerk nor the POLICE OFFICER cleared the gun.

  14. Bookram January 14, 2015 at

    Oh Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

  15. JohnD January 14, 2015 at

    Totally agree with the sentiment of responsible, armed citizens. What most don’t realize is that the Second Amendment of our Constitution doesn’t grant us the right to be armed – it’s purpose, just like the rest of the Bill of Rights, is to point out that the government has no right to infringe on our right to be armed. (“…, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”) All of mankind has the inalienable right to life, which entails our right to self defense by whatever means necessary. Throughout history, whenever a populace has had that right denied, the rule of force has always taken over. Think of it this way – there are only two ways to influence an outcome on people – through persuasion or through force. If someone wants you to do something, they can either persuade you to do it, or force you to do it. An armed person confronting an unarmed person has the ability to use either method. Think rape, robbery, terrorist attack, etc. (In the case of terrorist attack, the expected outcome is your death.) If both parties are armed, the playing field is level.

  16. Ken Shackleton January 14, 2015 at

    Our Charter of Rights guarantees “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.”

    Seems pretty straight-forward to me. If someone threatens you with death or grievous injury on your property…they are fair game.

  17. Frank January 15, 2015 at

    It would be impossible for a group of armed people to enter multiple points of entry and start killing people and have free reign over the mall if you had armed people capable of short-circuiting their plans at even one of those entry points. Especially if you were able to actually disable the entire group at that one point and get control of their weapons. At the very least, you could keep them from entering there and hold them up for a police assault force to take care of.

    • Sean Kibler January 17, 2015 at

      Exactly, and in the U.S most areas that are higher risk terrorist attack points are going to have a much quicker response time with a reasonable assault team like S.W.A.T. Whether you agree or disagree with militarized police forces they currently exist. Even if you die thwarting a terrorist attack and give enough time for an assault force to show up and mop the floor with them, you’ve potentially saved dozens of lives. Lets be honest if you are simply armed with a pistol and you are up against two or more semi-automatic rifles like AKs, with competent operators your probably dog meat.

  18. […] Europol recently stated that the only way to stop terror attacks against civilians is to allow us to bear arms – so we can shoot the jihadis before they shoot us. 5,000 is a lot, and there is good reason to suspect that the official numbers are much too low in order to not scare the public about how much danger we are actually in. On top of the official number of 5,000 comes the sleeper cells. Besides arming the civilians against this massive threat, Europol also advises border control, which the EU – who is much more interested in itself than the safety of the public – rejects. […]

  19. Frederick Freeman January 15, 2015 at

    Additional firearms regulation in unnecessary.

    Thankfully, mass murder is a very rare occurrence in the United States of America.

    Most firearms related deaths in America are suicides. Most murders in the US involve poor urban young people involved with the illegal drug trade.

    Law Enforcement cannot be everywhere, nor should it be.

  20. Stephen Fouche January 17, 2015 at

    In an ideal world (our global village) it would be nice to leave our physical safety in the hands of the police. Well quite obviously our world is in wicked shape and more than ever Joe citizens are going to need to be trained up and prepared to defend themselves. Evil will thrive wherever good people refuse to do what is right. We need real Christianity to come to the forefront – not people playing church. The real deal of a vital relationship with Jesus – where He teaches us to love our enemies and pray for them, even if we don’t like them or what they do. I personally believe we have the biblical right to defend our families and our country.
    The best way to defeat evil is by doing good and hope to high heaven that the example you have set will work – especially with your own loved ones. Right living is more caught than taught.
    Anyhow! just my opinion for what it is worth. We should be allowed by right to voice ours as long as it is not hate speech or propagating violence. May God bless us in our global village in the times to come so that we may have wisdom to stand for righteousness.

  21. Andrew January 19, 2015 at

    The thing most people forget is that Switzerland has mandatory military service, so after you get out you’re a citizen trained in proper use, care etc of firearms, as opposed to some of the nut-bags in the states that only have a firearm because “it’s in the constitution.

  22. Don January 21, 2015 at

    Our Supreme Court has ruled on multiple occasions that it is NOT the duty of law enforcement officers to protect the public. They serve to enforce law. They do not serve to defend the public.

    The responsibility for protecting one’s self and family resides within the individual citizen, and is enumerated in our Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights does not grant the right to keep and bear arms. Our founding fathers recognized that the right of self defense is a birthright. Read the definition of unalienable.

  23. Frank January 22, 2015 at

    Don is 100% correct, but Liberals/Democrats/Socialists/Progressives in America do NOT want the public to know this. They want the Police to be the only ones entrusted with weapons. The case law for most of those US Supreme Court rulings regarding the responsibility of the police are:

    In Warren v. District of Columbia (1981), the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled, official police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for failure to provide adequate police protection… a government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to any particular citizen.

    In Bowers v. DeVito (1982), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled,[T]here is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen.

    Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States, in which the court ruled, 7-2, that a town and its police department could not be sued under 42 U.S.C.§1983 for failing to enforce a restraining order, which had led to the murder of a woman’s three children by her estranged husband.

    In its landmark decision of DeShaney v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services (1988), the US Supreme Court declared that the Constitution does not impose a duty on the state and local governments to protect the citizens from criminal harm.

  24. James January 22, 2015 at

    Russia just loosened up laws allowing citizens to own and carry firearms for personal protection. Doesn’t sound like something a government that is trying to oppress their citizens would do, does it.

  25. Robert G January 22, 2015 at

    Through out history gun control has only served to help those with evil intentions. It’s time to kick out all politicians who support gun control on the law abiding.

  26. John R January 23, 2015 at

    An armed society is a polite society.

  27. Gerald Norton February 10, 2015 at

    More guns less crime . The united states needs a lot more safetyguns to stop the bad guys. I am safetyguns.org

  28. JaB November 16, 2015 at

    I’m Swiss and this article justifying “Switzerland has liberal gun laws and low homicide rates” is complete and utter bullshit.
    We are not allowed to carry guns in public. If so you need a very difficult to get gun licence which mostly only sports shooter, licensed hunters and a few individuals have. It’s like 100x more difficult here to obtain a weapon than in the US. And nobody is allowed to carry a loaded gun. Guns have to be in closed gun bags, ammunition has to be carried separately. Loaded guns are illegal to carry or transport. Oh and military personnel is allowed to store their gun at home when they are in the reserve, but only with 5 cartridges.

  29. Alex November 16, 2015 at

    Yes, let’s give more weapons to the masses. That for sure will decrease violence…. You must be all idiots!

  30. Peter November 16, 2015 at

    Do you see how some people drive their cars? Don’t know if I’d trust everyone with a gun.

  31. desiree November 18, 2015 at

    Cops kill unarmed adults and children because those cops “fear for their lives”. Imagine what they’d do if they saw someone with a gun. Actually, we don’t have to. They’ve been cleared of killing victims who have guns. Babies and children die because their caregivers were too stupid, too casual, and didn’t think to secure their guns. Supposedly, most gun deaths are due to suicide. And then there are the ones who fantasize they are the “James Bond”, “John Wayne”, “Jason Bourne” types who, under pressure and in spite of terrible distractions and demands, will be able to take out any threat with precision.

    I don’t know which would be the more dangerous environment; inner city streets and gang violence, or suburbia and small towns where everyone is armed, most are inexperienced, shoot-hungry, “It’s my God-given right to carry an assault rifle into the grocery store, on an airplane or a roller coaster” people who want to stroll about comparing fire power and shoot at anything they feel threatened or angered by.

    The fantasy where terrorists (foreign or domestic), murderers, kidnappers, thieves, rapists step into a public situation and threatens everyone so everyone pulls out their weapons and the bad guys give up.

    The reality, on the other hand, is terrifying.

  32. robert g November 18, 2015 at

    Better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it. No law abiding person has ever been helped by having their guns controlled. If you have to choose between begging a terrorist not to shoot you or being able to shoot back which would you choose.

    • Scott February 13, 2016 at

      When seconds count police are minutes away. I am a CCF citizen and train daily so that I am competent to handle my firearm with compleye confidence. As a matter of fact I probably train more than law enforcement. I have taken training to allow the licensed carry of my forearm and understand the consequences of improper use of said weapon. I also take yearly advanced courses to continue to elevate my knowledge and proficiency. This is not a matter of being a gun NUT but taking the responsibility to protect myself and family to the skill level where if needed I am not hesitant to act. Lives are not to be taken lightly. Self protection should not either!!!

  33. Scott February 13, 2016 at

    Simple as this if you want to be helpless then move to a country that does not allow self protection(guns). DO NOT try to force me to be helpless along with you. I prefer to protect myself and my family. Problem solved!!!!

  34. Sarchis Dolmanian June 14, 2016 at

    I’d rather put this in different terms.
    Guns are very powerful ‘differentiators’.
    The guy who has one easily dominates a crowd and, more often than not, you need another armed person to put him down.
    But mere possession of a gun is not enough. If that ‘good’ gun is not properly handled the gun battle between the good and the bad gun owners might kill more (innocent) people than the bad gun owner initially intended – if any.
    How about issuing open carry permits to people who take some special courses? Which would start with range training and end with crowd control, having some civics/ethics thrown in alongside very discrete psychological evaluations?
    These kinds of courses would have two kinds of benefits. Besides helping regular citizens help their communities in times of need they would be a perfect opportunity for community minded citizens to get together and forge long lasting bonds that will make those communities a lot stronger than they are now.
    “We have stopped caring about the guy next door to the tune of no longer being able to notice that he has become crazy and is about to start shooting.”
    https://nicichiarasa.wordpress.com/2016/06/13/my-family-rescued-me/

  35. Robert McNealy June 18, 2016 at

    If you don’t believe ( whether or not you appeal to GOD), that human beings are born with certain inalienable rights that cannot be over-ridden by the actions of any government, including the right to defend oneself and one’s property, you have doomed yourself to slavery and serfdom.

  36. Iftikhar Ahmad July 23, 2016 at

    Muslims are Terrorists !!? 1. The First World War 17 million dead (caused by non-Muslims)on 28 July 1914. 2. The Second World War 50-55 million dead (caused by non-Muslims) on 1939. 3. Nagasaki atomic bombs 200,000 dead (caused by non-Muslims) 4. The war in Vietnam over 5 million dead (caused by non-Muslims) 5. The war in Bosnia / Kosovo over 500,000 dead (caused non-Muslims) 6. War in Iraq (so far) 1,200,000 deaths (caused non-Muslims) 7. Afghanistan, Burma etc. (caused by Non-Muslims) 8.100 million native Americans brutally murdered in north America 50 million in south Caused by non Muslims From Napoleon to Hitler non of them were Muslim And it’s 60 years the genocide and killing of Palestinians still continue all world are witness ….! You still think that Islam is the problem?! Quran =And when it is said to them, “Do not cause corruption on the earth,” they say, “We are peace makers, but reformers.” [2:11] Judge with Justice between people (Quran.com/4/58).

    If Islam was not a peaceful religion then by God it wouldn’t have been the fastest growing religion in world.And believe me there is Allah. “In Islam there is no commandment to kill people by making such allegations against them. The cartoonists had exercised their freedom of expression, and freedom of expression is totally allowed in Islam. Even during the Prophet’s time there were several instances of ridicule, however the Prophet and his Companions neither punished such persons nor asked anyone to do so. On every occasion of this kind, the Prophet’s Companions always tried to positively disseminate the message of Islam. They never tried to punish these people. The killing of those people who had published the cartoons is a gravely un-Islamic act in the name of Islam. What did killing Saddam Husain do. What did killing Osama Bin laden do? NOTHING!!!. There is a long long line of replacements. I don’t know the answers. He was asked by MI5 to join them…so you know he is working for them.

    The British establishment is wrong in thinking that Imams are to blame for extremism. Imams are not solution to the problem for extremism. Extremism is nothing to do with Imams. Extremism is not created from abroad, it is coming from within. Britain fails to help Muslim communities feel part of British society. Race trouble is being predicted by the Daily Express, because of an ethnic boom in UK major cities. Muslim communities need imams for the solutions of their needs and demands in their own native languages. Muslim parents would like to see their children well versed in Standard English and to go for higher studies and research to serve humanity. The fact is that majority of Muslim children leave schools with low grades because monolingual teachers are not capable to teach Standard English to bilingual Muslim children.

    A Muslim is a citizen of this tiny global village. He/she does not want to become notoriously monolingual Brit. None of 7/7 bombers and British Muslim youths who are in Syria and Iraq are the product of Muslim schools. They are the product of British schooling which is the home of institutional racism with chicken racist native teachers. It is absurd to believe that Muslim schools, Imams and Masajid teach Muslim children anti-Semitic, homophobic and anti-western views. It is dangerously deceptive and misleading to address text books and discuss them out of their historical, cultural and linguistic context. When a native Brit goes to Middle East, he is called a voluntary fighter. When a Muslim goes there he is called a terrorist. Double standard by the British society. Also lot of British Jews went to Israel to fight but on their return no action was taken against them.

    Muslim community in all western countries does not want to change western education system. You better educate your children and let Muslim community educate their children according to their needs and demands. The Muslim community has been passing through a phase of fourth Crusades. The battleground is the field of education, where the young generation will be educated properly with the Holly Quran in one hand and Sciences in other hand to serve the British society and the world at large. A true Muslim is a citizen of the world, which has become a small global village. We are going to prepare our youth to achieve that objective in the long run. A true Muslim believes in Prophet Moses and the Prophet Jesus and without them one cannot be a Muslim. My suggestion is that in all state, independent and Christian based school special attention should be given to the teaching of Comparative Religion and Islam should be taught by qualified Muslim Teachers to make the children aware the closeness of Islam to Christianity and Judaism which will help them to think about Islam, as “A Pragmatic and Modern Way of Life,” during their life time.

    The demand for Masajid, state funded Muslim schools with Muslim teachers, Halal meat. Muslim cemeteries and Sharia laws are nothing to do with segregation integration or community cohesion and harmony. A Muslim is a citizen of this tiny global village. The whole world belongs to Muslims. He does not want to be notoriously monolingual Brit. Being a British is a fake identity. In the past, Muslim community was a victim of Paki-bashing in all fields of life by the British society. Now it is a victim of Islamophobia by the British elites and media.

    Muslim community in all western countries need Masajid, state funded Muslim schools , Halal meat and Muslim cemeteries. West must learn to respect and tolerate those who are different. Don’t these hypocrites idiots know what their ancestors did to Native American Indians they slaughtered 150 millions of Native American Indians! and also do they know that Great Britain invaded 80% countries around the world? They should call them terrorist first and as well call their ancestors terrorist! British did the same to Native American Indians and sadly they still treat Native American Indians badly! So Americans Indians know how you Muslims feel! They stolen Indian land and killed 150 millions of Indians the British did! They were forced to go to the white man’s school and learn the language, culture and faith of the white man. Inspite of that, they are still the under dogs of the American society.

    Muslim children need state funded Muslim schools with Muslim teachers as role models during their developmental periods. There is no place for a non-Muslim child or a teacher in a Muslim school. The West has never been at ease with Islam since the Crusades. It is unfortunate that huge oil supplies lie under the Arabian Deserts. It is the West that stirred the trouble that led to 9/11. That attack was a desperate act of by men prepared to lose their life. We need to get to grips on who is the terrorist? On 24 November 1963, Lyndon Johnson said, “the battle against communism… must be joined… with strength and determination. Some three million lives were lost in the consequential battles. The US had to pull out due to Public Opinion. Communism lived on. So who was the terrorist?

    The British establishment is wrong in thinking that Imams are to blame for extremism. Imams are not solution to the problem for extremism. Extremism is nothing to do with Imams. Extremism is not created from abroad, it is coming from within. Britain fails to help Muslim communities feel part of British society. Race trouble is being predicted by the Daily Express, because of an ethnic boom in UK major cities. Muslim communities need imams for the solutions of their needs and demands in their own native languages. Muslim parents would like to see their children well versed in Standard English and to go for higher studies and research to serve humanity. The fact is that majority of Muslim children leave schools with low grades because monolingual teachers are not capable to teach Standard English to bilingual Muslim children. A Muslim is a citizen of this tiny global village. He/she does not want to become notoriously monolingual Brit.

    Terrorism and sexual grooming is nothing to do with Masajid, Imams and Muslim schools. Those Muslim youths who have been involved in terrorism and sexual grooming are the product of western education system which makes a man stupid, selfish and corrupt. They find themselves cut off from their cultural heritage, literature and poetry. They suffer from identity crises and I blame British schooling.

    The shocking level of targeting of the Muslim community of Birmingham is indicative of the normalisation of the dehumanisation of the Muslims of Britain. Under the pretext of “extremism”, criminal undemocratic and unethical abuse of public institutions and the Muslims of the UK can occur without much accountability. This pervasive attitude, especially amongst officials like Michael Gove needs to change. Our schools are truly trying to develop our children to do well at schools so later in life they are able to stand on their own two feet, but if we stop our schools from doing this than our country will have up rise of unemployment, benefit issues, crime levels high, I think its time for you apologize and allow practitioners to do their job right.

    West must learn to respect and tolerate those who are different. Muslim population is on the increase in all western countries because of immigration, high birth rate and conversion. There will never be an end to immigration from Muslim countries. Islamic studies should be a compulsory subject in all schools and colleges for the benefit of the western people and Muslim children should have their own state funded Muslim schools with Muslim teachers, otherwise, they would be lost in western jungle.
    IA
    ttp://www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk

  37. David West July 27, 2016 at

    Most terrorist deaths are from bombs etc, how does arming everyone stop that? It doesn’t. More guns means more deaths, look at the US death rate from guns compared to countries where they have gun controls.

    Would it stop this kind of thing?

    http://sana.sy/en/?p=83691

    No.

  38. Pola July 27, 2016 at

    Interpol! That is an asshole argument.

  39. SuchindranathAiyerS July 28, 2016 at

    The quadratics are like this: The Governments (ruling tyrants) have disarmed people to protect themselves from public rage. But the tyrants are now unable to protect citizens from Islam and are sacrificing their citizens to Islam to protect themselves. Like the wife shot her husband in his foot with a Beretta when they were fleeing an escaped tiger.

    Governments will not arm the people against Islam (themselves) People have to take the weapons and the law into their own hands:

  40. Dave In Arizona July 29, 2016 at

    So, how many decades did it take for them to figure that out?

Leave a comment

Search

Back to Top