Friday, April 21, 2006

Why should anyone be stunned that a disarmed people are easy prey?

The cover story of Thursday's New York Post was about a punk who stabbed a woman and then her boyfriend in a crowded subway car -- all because she supposedly kept staring at him. The attacker got caught, and charged only with assault and weapons possession. How about charging him with some real crimes, so that we can throw him into a cell on Riker's Island and keep him away from civilized society?

This attack would never have happened, though, if New Yorkers were not so disarmed. Even if the guy were a lunatic and didn't consider his victim might shoot him, at the moment he brandished a blade, the boyfriend could have blown him away regardless. The article concluded, "Straphangers were stunned that the attack happened on a crowded train in a safe neighborhood." Stunned? Like sheep, people in a good area are easy prey. They are more likely to assume a high degree of safety because of their better surroundings, and they are more likely to be "good citizens" who obey the unconstitutional gun control laws.

As Capital Freedom explained so well, a criminal's cost of committing crimes goes down a great deal when they know the victim doesn't have a firearm. What, then, if municipalities stop preventing citizens from carrying concealed weaponry as they wish? Should we expect the NYC subway system to turn into a shooting gallery? Far from it, actually. We "gun nuts" are accused of oversimplifying things when we say, "An armed society is a polite society," but the saying is nonetheless true. The "Old West," with all its gunfighters and outlaws, was actually a very respectful place because of all the heat being packed.

Similarly, I'd expect the subway passengers to become extraordinarily polite. No one looking to board would stand right in front of the subway doors, for example, which makes it hard for people who are disembarking. One evening, I had to get off by pushing through a trio of young males. It greatly irritated me, so I intentionally gave one a very hard shoulder as I shoved past them. He shouted back in a heavy Hispanic accent, "Hey, man!" and poked me hard on the shoulder with his finger. That was actually a dangerous thing for me to do, because he could have easily used a knife. He could have concealed the weapon so that none of the other passengers would be the wiser, and in case there were witnesses, he and his friends could have gotten off at the next stop and disappeared into the crowds. But without gun control laws, with a strong possibility that I was as armed at least as well, these eses wouldn't have risked getting shot for poking me. I likewise wouldn't have muscled through and risked an exchange of bullets, but it wouldn't have happened in the first place: they wouldn't have blocked people from exiting and risked that someone was having a bad day.

Now, those of you in the city might think I have no place to talk, since I'm from Westchester, but frankly, I was rather ashamed of the other subway passengers' behavior. With so many of them, and only one man, why didn't they do something? New Yorkers might be the toughest people in the world, a sentiment expressed by many in the aftermath of 9/11, but none of that toughness was evidenced yesterday. Note what the article said:
Panicked straphangers fled to the other end of the car.

The victims chased Murphy out of the train when it pulled into the 14th Street station and tried in vain to catch him. A witness who saw the bloodied couple called 911 and cops quickly arrived.
Not only did everyone else not want to assist, only the victims tried to chase the punk! Where's Crocodile Dundee when you need him? Whatever happened to strength in numbers? No one thought to use a bag or backpack to deflect the blade, while others wrestled him down? On the other hand, the hero award goes to the boyfriend, who did what any other real man would, and defended his lady.

Since New York and many other cities keep the honest citizenry disarmed, one must learn to defend in other ways. Various martial arts, like jujutsu, have relatively simple defenses against knife attacks that do not require great strength or first-rate skill. Especially when most assailants don't know the proper way to hold a knife (though it's effective against someone who doesn't know self-defense), the right hold and throw can disarm your attacker. One of my friends, a black belt in Tae Kwon Do, showed me a move that anyone can use against a stabbing motion coming from above. It doesn't work against the more common "slash" motion, but there are defenses for that too. It's not impossible for an ordinary person to defend against a knife; you don't have to be Jackie Chan and quickly use an article of clothing.


Blogger septagon said...

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Amendment II US constitution

"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privieledges or immunities of citizens of the United States..."
Amendment XIV Section 1

It is amazing how the US Supreme Court, US congress, and the several States continue to ignore the law of the land

Saturday, April 22, 2006 12:37:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home