I recently suggested in my column, The Firearms Lawyer (see FEDERAL WAY MIRROR), that violent crime has increased in Phoenix. Apparently it has actually gone down! But Arizona’s violent crime rate is nevertheless still well above the national average and Phoenix and Tucson compare particularly unfavorably with most other U.S. cities!
A recent Wall Street Journal story shows that crime has actually been going down over most of the U.S. “For the first quarter of 2010, violent crime was down 17% overall in the city (of Phoenix), while homicides were down 38% and robberies 27%, compared with the same period in 2009.”
Despite the fact that the violent crime rate has gone down in Phoenix, the murder rate was 2.4 times the national average in 2003. The murder rate from 2008 to 2009 has dropped 26.2 percent. In 2003, Phoenix was ranked number seventeen in the U.S for violent crime with Tucson number eighteen.
Using statistics going back to 1985, Phoenix’s highest murder rate was in 1994, when there were 231 murders. The city had 1,076,108 people, and a murder rate of 21.5 murders per 100,000 residents. The highest total number of murders was in 2003, when there were 241 murders. Thus, the decrease in crime is measured from fairly high benchmarks established during the years when illegal immigration went from being a river to a virtual flood.
The Phoenix rate for murder probably still lags behind cities like Chicago and Detroit, however. According to the Washington Times, “The latest figures show that Chicago had racked up 122 homicides for the year (2010), exceeding the 116 killings over the comparable period in 2009, a very bad year… It’s no coincidence that the Windy City is already the U.S. gun-control capital.”
Arizona, on the other hand, is a very gun-friendly state. None of the above can tell us whether the murders are being committed by people that are in Arizona illegally or whether more or less guns would impact violent crime statistics positively or negatively!
Would Arizona’s violent crime rate be higher or lower if Arizona adopted a draconian prohibition on firearms such as exists within the Windy City’s boundaries? One thing we know for sure- making it easier to come here illegally breeds contempt for the law!
“Liberal” gun-grabbers use statistics to argue that less crime cries out for more gun control (i.e., guns not necessary) and then cry for more restrictions when violent crime increases. One minute the gun-toting rednecks are “paranoid“; the next moment private possession of firearms is responsible for fomenting a wave of sociopathic mayhem!
Banning guns as Chicago has done, is a form of legalistic anarchy!
The perception is that illegal aliens in Phoenix are perpetrating a great deal of violent crime. Some folks in Arizona apparently believe that the failure to police the border is threatening the social fabric of their state. I would be interested to know how violent crime rates for Seattle, Tacoma and Federal Way compare to Arizona cities like Phoenix and Tucson.
It is self-evident that the Second Amendment determines that the citizens should be able to decide whether to carry a gun without the government dictating the answer to that question for us.
Additionally, the fact that journalists around the world are constantly targeted for violence suggests that even if the rate of violent crime were to plummet to zero percent, a blogger or journalist that discusses subjects like terrorism, Mexican cartels and active shooters could become a target for the kind of people about whom he or she writes. Or someone that writes about Scientology for that matter- or in favor of abortion! And what if you just happen to witness a violent crime in a city where the crime rate is low and the person that is accused and prosecuted decides to kill you in order to prevent you from testifying?
In the U.S., we have seen a few isolated attacks against journalists such as the attack against Chauncey Bailey. Bailey was allegedly gunned down by Black Muslims in Oakland, California after he exposed criminal activity. The statistics manufactured by pro-gun advocates often don’t prove much more than that if you like statistics you will always find some numbers that suit your purposes!
Well-documented evidence shows that the cartels are smuggling immigrants in from Mexico and warehousing people, often against their will, in houses within Phoenix. The number of kidnappings reported in Phoenix, which hit 368 in 2008 is down. According to a May 25, 2010 article in the Wall Street Journal, police officials don’t have exact figures. But some professional security forecasters predict that kidnapping is predicted to spread beyond Phoenix. We know that the crime of rape increased in Phoenix amd kidnappings are the highest in the U.S. and higher than most places in the world!
Even though the violent crime rate is apparently going down, a violent predator may come looking for you just because you said something (or saw something) that someone doesn’t want law enforcement to know about. The First Amendment freedom to speak the truth as we see the truth becomes very hollow indeed when the sociopaths are looking for you. Statistics will not protect you or me or our friends and loved ones from violent predators in Seattle, Federal Way or Phoenix! Another statistic I would like to see is how many violent crimes are committed in Seattle by illegal immigrants that have been protected from deportation by means of Seattle’s status as a “sanctuary city.” There have recently been several well-publicized rapes committed in Washington state- allegedly by individuals in the U.S. illegally.
According to the Second Amendment Foundation and Joe Waldron:
“The Northwest has a particular problem with violent illegal aliens. The last three peace officers killed in eastern Washington all died at the hands of illegal aliens. An illegal alien named Hector Francisco Diaz killed a man in Everett last November (2006). Prosecutors in Snohomish County won’t charge him with murder because they believe he acted in self-defense, but he remains in jail on drug trafficking charges.
We love and respect every tribe and tongue and nationality. America is not centered on an ethnic group. We hold to a secular creed (the U.S. Constitution) that has its roots in the great religious truths pertaining to individual liberty, economic freedom and limited government under the restraints of just laws applied equally.
We don’t know whether life in the U.S.A. will deteriorate or improve. Nor is exercising your Constitutional duties by speaking out as an involved citizen, being vigilant, training with weapons and remaining armed a guarantee of security!
The watchman watches in vain unless God stands guard over the city.
Permalink
There are 10 peaks over 14,000 feet high in the Sangre de Cristo range.
I am intrigued by the fact that the inhabitants of New Mexico’s scarred spaces were the last to submit to North American law. After reading a biography of Kit Carson, I recently came across a travelogue titled “God’s Middle Finger.” The author decided to travel into the Sierra Madre, the jagged range that climbs to 11,000 feet through 900 miles of Northern Mexico — starting just south of Tucson, Ariz.
According to author Richard Grant, the range contains several canyons that are deeper than the Grand Canyon. The Sierra Madre provided hiding places for Chiricahua Apaches well into the 1900s. The presence of the Apaches and the knife-edged landscape prevented the Mexican government from asserting its authority.
Copper Canyon is one of the only tourist spots in the Sierra Madre, however. The Copper Canyon tourist industry advertises: “Don’t miss out on trip of a lifetime because of trouble at the border. It is, however, best to fly here to Los Mochis and just avoid the long bus trips through the border. Hope to see you soon!”
There are not many tourist spots in such fabulous landscapes because the bandits in the Sierra Madre are known to take tourists out of buses and strip them of everything including clothes. The bandits are fairly tame, however, compared to the narcotraficantes. According to Grant, the drug traffickers in the Sierra Madre will often kill people just for the sheer pleasure of killing.
Grant met different people that led him into the Sierra Madre’s rocky topography — a stronghold for many of the Mexican drug cartels. Along the way, Grant learned that, although Mexico is offically a gun-free zone, killing with guns is as natural as breathing in the Sierra Madre.
An AK-47 is the weapon of choice and even young children pack heat with impunity. One of the men told Grant, “Further north they grow more drugs, but here we are hundred percent killers.” Then they began to hunt Grant with high-powered scoped rifles just for sport.
Would you take your family to visit our national parks if you thought you might end up meeting the same folks Grant met? Come to think of it, according to the Seattle Times, Sequoia National Park has no-go zones for visitors and park rangers during the growing season when well-armed operatives of the Mexican drug lords cultivate massive pot farms.
Take the profit out of the drug business by legalizing drugs? Many experts predict that the cartels are already positioning themselves within the U.S. crime industry to diversify into activities like kidnapping and extortion. Securing our borders, on the other hand, seems to depend on the politics of race and corporate greed.
Arizona’s attempt to discourage illegal immigration may be stymied by judicial fiat. Meanwhile, some illegalesidents of Arizona may head north to avoid the harassment predicted to result from Arizona’s new law. Whether or not violent crime statistics move upward in Washington state, the potential for malfeasance by politicians is one reason why our forefathers provided for every man to be armed.
Republished with permission of the Federal Way Mirror.
Permalink
The manner in which societies organize for warfare has always been dependent on a number of interrelated factors. Technology is an important factor but there are many instances where societies that are behind in the technology of warfare or even behind in industrial strength and other economic factors have been able to become better organized than their opponents. Japan, for example, created the first successful carrier groups and managed to do this virtually overnight in the years before Pearl Harbor. At Pearl Harbor the Japanese executed tactics gleaned from systematic study of the British attack on Taranto that destroyed a major portion of the Italian Navy.
Just prior to WW II, theorists like Liddell Hart advocated in favor of integrating fast moving armored vehicles with smaller infantry units and air cover. The only authorities in a position to follow Hart’s innovative doctrine that were actually listening were members of the German High Command. The Germans’ execution of the lightning-fast tactics that the world came to know as Blitzkrieg overran France’s “state of the art” defenses in a matter of a few days with a loss of German lives that was almost nil!
The ability of the U.S. to mobilize and organize a civilian industrial base in order to convert to the building of carriers and planes and other military armament was one important factor that turned the tables on the Japanese and the Germans.
Hitler attempted to personally manage and direct forces that had been effectively trained to proceed with a great deal of rapid decision making at the operational level. Hitler’s seriously flawed military logic in overriding the advice of his generals and consigning Gen. Paulus’ Sixth Army to utter destruction led to its defeat on the Eastern Front.
Over time, battlefields, as the world historically has perceived battlefields to exist, have become almost a thing of the past. During the Napoleonic Wars, hundreds of thousands of men were formed into massed ranks which presented solid boxes at which their opponents would fire. Soldiers on both sides were ordered to fire into massed ranks of the enemy, usually without taking aim.
The field of battle was filled with black powder smoke and cannon balls would skip across the open ground, often removing heads and arms and legs as the iron balls bounded through rows of soldiers lined up like bowling pins.
The American Civil War and WW I caused great loss of life because both sides had such accurate rifles, machine guns and artillery that the men were pinned down in deadly trench warfare. The certainty of death by exposing men to such accurate long range fire initiated a search for new battlefield doctrine that would avoid the drawn out carnage and attrition of the trenches.
By WW II, the German High Command’s innovative mix of tanks, armored vehicles and planes dictated a new kind of warfare that depended on speed and initiative rather than masses of men. The other great powers had greater resources in terms of weapons and by almost every other manner of reckoning. The Germans, nevertheless, had developed a process of planning, innovating and testing various plans and tactics involving new technologies that other leaders only vaguely understood until the German onslaught demonstrated to the world what the English historian, Basil Liddell Hart, had been talking about for so many years; i.e., decentralized coordination between fast moving infantry, mechanized troops and tactical air support.
By the time of the first Gulf War, the U.S. was able to detect and destroy Iraqi armor so effectively that enemy troops just gave up and walked into the desert. At the present time, there is no enemy in the world that can challenge the U.S. on the high seas, in the air or on land. Our forces are trained, organized and equipped in ways that no other nation can match. Thus, it is as if the U.S. holds the power of a magistrate; i.e., we are literally the policeman of the world.
This situation prevails as a result of GPS, satellite reconnaissance, networked communications, along with other technogies that make it possible for planners located anywhere in the world to view every inch of a battlefield environment and communicate instructions or reach out and touch personnel and equipment in real time while committing few, if any, troops to the battlefield arena. This is because of robot technology and surveillance systems that make death almost certain for any personnel that expose themselves to the systems our planners and scientists have developed.
According to Max Boot in “War Made New”, however, every victor runs the risk of becoming complacent and relying on the technological and military prowess that provided the last victory. While the U.S. was basking in the benefits of the “peace dividend” our enemies were exploring our weaknesses. The fact that no army will expose itself to the bewildering networks of weaponry deployed by our armed forces creates a new medium of battle. The only way for an enemy to attack is to infiltrate our society with networks that operate with the kind of decentralized structure by which our own special forces deploy.
Each new innovation can only be integrated into a battle system by gradual experimentation and tactical experience. One example of such innovation is information reported by military intelligence that terrorists are using online social networking systems to identify targets, communicate strike opportunities as they arise and conduct survellance. Thus, older technology is always preserved alongside state of the art developments. This fact brings us to an interesting thesis.
It is a matter of less than five yearse before WMDs will be deployed within the U.S. homeland, according to the a new report by the co-chairmen of the 9/11 Commission. See EMP Attack. Suit-case nukes, biological weapons and chemical warfare are all available to terrorists and criminals. The argument that nuclear weapons are too high-tech for terrorists is more a kind of denial than a reassurance to any thinking person. Those who really study such subjects at the highest levels state that is not a matter of if but when the enemy will unleash such weaponry.
Many small arms and personnel are pouring back and forth across the U.S.-Mexican border. An epidenic of kidnappings has started in Phoenix and experts predict that the business of kidnapping is spreading to other cities in the U.S. The fact that many of the kidnappings and much of the contraband and personnel crossing the border involves Mexican gangs goes hand in hand with credible intelligence that Middle Eastern personnel are also coming across our Southern border and receiving many kinds of weapons other than just small arms.
When the new administration uses the complaints about U.S. manufactured guns showing up South of the border, ask yourself whether you would care to be defenseless in El Paso, Texas when the violence spills over the border from Ciudad Juárez.
According to the New York Times, cities llike El Paso, Phoenix and Tucson are “hardly alone in feeling the impact of Mexico’s drug cartels and their trade. In the past few years, the cartels and other drug trafficking organizations have extended their reach across the United States and into Canada. Law enforcement authorities say they believe traffickers distributing the cartels’ marijuana, cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and other drugs are responsible for a rash of shootings in Vancouver, British Columbia, kidnappings in Phoenix, brutal assaults in Birmingham, Ala., and much more.”
It will not take a WMD event to paralyze our economy. Even temporary economic and social disruption could make our armed forces vulnerable. Various synchronized forces and events are ready to converge in many parts of the world. Cyber-warfare and political confusion can amount to chaos in the midst of profound despair and recriminations.
Think about the questions that existed (and still exist) after the WTC attacks and the invasion of Iraq. Some people still question whether Al Qaeda was really behind the attacks. The apparent confusion about how seriously the American public should view terrorist threats raises the issue of whether additional unrecognized enemies can wreak havoc. Can terrorists intitiate attacks in a manner that disguises the identity of the enemy power initiating an attack? Can these attacks occur via tactical teams utilizing small arms, WMDs or industrial-financial sabotage by computer-hacking or some other electronic attack?
Think about this scenario: An ordinary-looking freighter ship heading toward New York or Los Angeles launches a missile from its hull or from a canister lowered into the sea. It hits a densely populated area. A million people are incinerated. The ship is then sunk. No one claims responsibility. There is no firm evidence as to who sponsored the attack, and thus no one against whom to launch a counterstrike.
But as terrible as that scenario sounds, there is one that is worse. Let us say the freighter ship launches a nuclear-armed Shahab-3 missile off the coast of the U.S. and the missile explodes 300 miles over Chicago. The nuclear detonation in space creates an electromagnetic pulse (EMP).
Gamma rays from the explosion, through the Compton Effect, generate three classes of disruptive electromagnetic pulses, which permanently destroy consumer electronics, the electronics in some automobiles and, most importantly, the hundreds of large transformers that distribute power throughout the U.S. All of our lights, refrigerators, water-pumping stations, TVs and radios stop running. We have no communication and no ability to provide food and water to 300 million Americans.
This is what is referred to as an EMP attack, and such an attack would effectively throw America back technologically into the early 19th century.
DARPA, a U.S. Government R & D technology lab, was able to create microwave technology at a relatively local cost with generally available electronic components that could disarm many high tech weapons systems. Such inexpensive designs are published on the internet.
The best way to deal with roving bands of killers is on their own terms. The low-tech swarming concept developed by terrorists is also one of the evolving doctrines of our own special forces. A unit or individual blends into the social environment and, by means of cheap handheld GPS units (available at any electronics shop or outdoor store), cell phone and laptop, units come together as opportunities are presented. Similarly, the ancient Parthian and Mongolians and Turks were just some of the Asiatic horsemen that were able to envelope their enemies by converging from many directions with little or no apparent leadership.
The fact that the Asian “hordes” knew their enemies’ weaknesses stands in stark contrast to the lack of knowledge regarding the onslaught on the part of their victims (Europeans, Persians and Arabic societies, as well as the Chinese empire, to name a few). Such swarming tactics resulted in whole regions becoming systematically repopulated with mountains of skulls.
When a team comes together the units “swarm” their enemy like wolf packs or sharks. The best weapons against such forces are forces of citizens that are armed and trained to detect patterns, react and respond until the police and/or military take over.
The principle of social organization that most characterized the Twentieth Century is the same principle upon which 19th Century factories and armies were organized; the military-industrial complex organized as a massive hierarchy of professionals, bureaucrats, and engineers; i.e., as cog-like components in a huge machine. The concept of a citizen militia seemed outmoded by the 1950s.
A conventional comment is that, “The professional soldiers can provide for our defense.” The idea of a citizen armed with a deer rifle standing up to Blitzkrieg-style storm troopers seems laughable. The U.S. homeland, however, is unlikely to sustain a conventional attack on our homeland, unless our society is already decimated by the networks of terror cells that may already be waiting for the “perfect storm” to arrive.
The fact that so many naysayers deny that we are embroiled in real warfare is because the nature of the new warfare is such that there is normally not a conventional battlefield space.
The real space where the battle occurs is in hearts and minds of citizens and the outcome is determined by how we prepare for and then react to sudden manifestations of violence in schools, churches and synagogues, malls, streets or workplaces.
Our enemies will exploit any dissension (especially partisan gamesmanship) and attempt to break down our trust by creating horrific fear at the same time as the true aims and source of the terrorist acts become more difficult to identify. One source of such “plausible deniability” may result from more than one set of actors with conflicting ideological and national loyalties getting involved, perhaps in joint operations.
There are no means by which enough police can be deployed to guard all our schools. Think of all the workplaces, intersections, overpasses, malls, churches and other facilities where a few homicide teams or even women and children that worship death and are bent on destruction and suicide can systematically murder many innocent Americans.
The best defense will be men and women, armed with hand guns and proper training. The government will not take the initiative to train you because “thinking outside the box” is the province of a few individuals- individuals that may lack the patience to wade through the bureaucratic gauntlets. Military officers normally listen to credible military leaders, usually from within their own command.
Even a President or Secretary of Defense has a very difficult time changing the military culture and landscape, littered as it is with turf wars. It took years to unify the various armed forces into an integrated structure where each branch coordinates with the other. A few citizens armed with pistols and spare magazines probably cannot stop a WMD. But think of what happens after a WMD event. If a suit case bomb explodes do you think the carnage will just stop there?
There are some quiet discussions going on among our political leaders about the possibility of arming some of the staff in our schools. There may be a need to change some state and federal laws. Every war takes a different kind of thinking than the last war. The concept that may be foremost in the present day battlefield is “swarming”. No one quite knows quite how it works but for defense of our U.S. homeland it could be as simple as several armed people that are near an intersection stopping one or more terrorist teams from systematically executing drivers while stopped at a traffic light during rush hour.
A Pakistani terrorist, Mir Aimal Kasi, attacked CIA personnel outside the CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, killing two CIA employees and wounding three in 1993.
“At around 8 a.m. on January 25, 1993, Kasi stopped his Isuzu pickup behind a number of vehicles waiting at a red traffic light on the eastbound side of Route 123, Fairfax County. The vehicles were waiting to make a left turn into the main entrance of CIA headquarters. Kasi emerged from his vehicle with an AK-47 and proceeded to move among the lines of vehicles, firing into them. Within seconds, he had killed Lansing H. Bennett MD, 66, and Frank Darling, 28. Three others were left with gunshot wounds. Darling was shot first and later received additional gunshot wounds to the head after Kasi shot the other victims.”
Kasi stated later that he wanted to kill people that were more important to the government. Kasi escaped and was hiding in Afghanistan from where the FBI lured him with an offer of a business deal and then captured him by going to his hotel room in Dera Ghazi Khan, in the Punjab province of Pakistan, “rendering” Kasi back to the U.S. Kasi was tried and convicted in the U.S. On November 12, 1997, four US oil executives and their Pakistani taxi driver were shot dead in Karachi, in what was described as a deliberate response to Kasi’s guilty verdict. Kasi was executed by lethal injection in 2002.
All the military experts recognize the viability of the swarming concept. Swarming tactics do not require advanced technology. Just as happens on any other battlefield, technology plays its part and we need the professionals. Ordinary citizens will usually be able to respond to an emergency that occurs in a public location more quickly than the police. If the professionals are tied down by multiple emergencies, trained volunteers with radios, cell phones and preparation for defensive tactical engagement may be able to head off potentially devastating attacks. Or even confront jihadist homicide teams.
Citizen defense conflicts with the way many of us have been trained to react but such thinking is in line with the mental outlook of most freedom loving people up until a few generations ago. One of the reasons that Americans got away from such civil defense strategies relates to the defunct official philosophy that the world would be destroyed by nuclear events if there was ever a war. Thus, the notion developed that there was no use preparing to defend against our enemies since “mutual assured destruction” had become official policy under the Strategic Arms Limitations Treaty (SALT). Even military forces were reconfigured in a manner reflecting the primacy of the unthinkable nuclear threat.
The contributions of many human resources and various perspectives from inside and outside the ranks of the security professionals is indispensible. Intelligence and sophisticated communications, radioactivity detection, bomb squads and medical/rescue teams have been augmented with billions in federal and state funds. Nevertheless, you can get to your neighbor’s home in an emergency faster than any other “first responder“.
You don’t have to be covered with body armor or trained as a SWAT operator or to operate radar to get a concealed carry license, take some defensive shooting classes and think tactically.
The government has also spent billions to inform citizens about the importance of vigilance and getting ready for emergencies. There is a great deal of training being provided by local governments but, at least for now, the tactical training is something that you will have to develop without government assistance, unless you work for the government. Think about the nature of modern warfare and why individually armed men and women may become more important to our national security than ever before. Our biggest vulnerability is also our greatest strength- the mindset of the average American citizen.
See Citizen Journalists for information related to how journalism and online social networking can relate to Online Civil Defense.
Permalink
We presented our third class in Federal Way on Wednesday, May 12, 2010 at Federal Way City Hall. We had 16 participants most of whom are volunteers with our local police department and/or volunteer emergency personnel. The May class focused on Washington law and the use of lethal force to protect your home and family.
We are available to meet with your neighborhood group, church or business and present a seminar specially tailored to your needs.
We will customize a presentation for your group or business organization anywhere in Washington State. We can help you develop a threat response plan for your church and will provide legal training for your family members or volunteers. We recently presented the class at Holmes harbor Rod & Gun Club on Whidbey Island in February and almost thirty people attended.
Our motto is think like a man of action and act like a man of thought. Speak cautiously and politely and only use deadly force after you have thought through everything carefully. Apply cautious reasoning powers to each situation but start doing so now, not when you are faced with a decision in which you may have seconds to save your own life or the lives of your loved ones!
We have a message and a curriculum that relates to overcoming threats of violence by a combination of intelligence, moral persuasion, physical courage and deadly force if necessary.
The cost for the class is $49.00 but still only $79.00 for a couple.
Magna Charta
We emphasize development of good legal and tactical reasoning- reasoning that will allow you to understand your situation more accurately if you are ever faced with the necessity of confronting lethal force.
Remember, every principle must be applied by means of thoughtfully contemplating the moral, legal and tactical issues engendered by the subject matter. There are no answers that are always right in every situation.
Marty Hayes, the founder of Firearms Academy of Seattle was our guest speaker for February. Marty discussed the Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network, FAS and how training protects us legally from accusations that we are acting without knowledge of the legal rules pertaining to use of lethal force. Marty stayed for the three hour class and participated in our discussions, including almost an hour of informal discussion after class was dismissed. Marty has many years experience as an LEO, police instructor and as an instructor of armed citizens. Everyone, including me, learned a great deal from the time spent together.
Classes include but are not limited to:
1. Who should carry;
2. Concealed carry and open carry options, including Washington State case law pertaining to unlawful display of a weapon;
3. How to carry your weapon;
4. Deploying deadly force;
5. When and where to go with your weapon;
6. How to interact with law enforcement before, during and after an incident;
7. Threat response planning for home & business;
8. Stress psychology;
9. Preparing for the aftermath of a justified self-defense scenario.
We expect everyone to take notes! Keep your class notes and materials. Your firearms training materials may someday become necessary to document a life or death decision to use deadly force if you need to defend yourself in court. The stakes will be high- before, during and after a violent confrontation. After the gunfight, however, the thugs may be wearing suits and carrying brief cases!
Keep your class notes sealed in your gun safe or some other secure location so that you have documentation in court for every decision you make during a violent encounter.
Learning is facilitated by asking the right questions and participating in lively and informative discussions. Most of the issues that arise do not have clear answers but in the event that you are confronted with a threat of death or grave bodily harm, the choices become fairly simple. Only use deadly force when you are confronted with deadly force that is an imminent threat to you or an innocent person that is in your immediate presence.
Permalink
I cut my teeth as a Structural Ironworker but I love literature and philosophy. Standing on a steel I-beam forty stories above the streets of San Francisco with a load of iron swinging over my head taught me about what was important.
When I was ironworking, I read a book by a “LONGSHOREMAN PHILOSOPHER” that worked on the docks of the nearby Embarcadero until he was sixty-five years old!
The February 24th issue of the Federal Way Mirror contained an article by our Federal Way school superintendant entitled “AN ARGUMENT OVER WHAT J.D. SALINGER MEANT”. Tom Murphy’s article is quite literary and philosophical, replete with a reference to recently deceased Salinger’s novellas. Most baby-boomers remember Salinger for “CATCHER IN THE RYE”- required reading when we were coming of age.
I also appreciate literature and I cannot resist commenting on the passing of an important literary figure like J.D. Salinger. As a youth with a penchant for Aldous Huxley novels and Eric Hoffer, I pondered the existential significance of Holden Caulfield, the protagonist of Salinger’s 1951 tour de force. I identified with Caulfield’s angst, learned to despise my betters (and any kind of worthwhile accomplishment) and habitually used the “F” word at least once in most of my sentences.
Now don’t jump to the conclusion that I am about to accuse Salinger of corrupting American youth! Modernistic mayhem was being perpetrated on American culture long before and after Salinger’s callow anti-hero slouched around the American literary scene looking for an identity. The New York-Parisian literary mafia regaled us with perversion, blasphemous Gonzo-journalistic drug trips and suicidal ideations unknown to all but the most pagan of ancient mystery-cults. Such authors were not regular reading in the schools prior to CATCHER IN THE RYE but, nevertheless….
In 1780, John Adams wrote a letter to his wife, Abigail, stating that:
I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history and naval architecture, navigation, commerce and agriculture, in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain.
Imagine Holden Caulfield disarming a crazed gunman. Remember the 52 year old teacher that stopped a school shooting near Columbine, Colorado earlier this year? Discussing whether that teacher should have been trained and armed makes more sense than studying Shakespeare (or rap lyrics) when you have jihad chat rooms abuzz with strategies for invading schools.
Isn’t it about time to start discussing how to protect the kids in our schools? Right now all that stands between the kids and mayhem are good intentions. John Adams’ reference to “politics” wasn’t in reference to the mud-wrestling for power that characterizes today’s political spectacle. He meant the art of getting people to work towards mutual self-interest.
Let’s study politics and war again! True believers will sanctimoniously sneer at proposals to arm volunteers. Maybe they had Holden Caulfield as their role model.
Permalink
Interpretation of Washington state gun laws | Firearms Lawyer
By MARK KNAPP
Reprinted with permission of Federal Way Mirror
Apr 27 2010, 1:42 PM
The Port of Seattle recently amended its rules to permit wearing a weapon in the passenger terminal outside of the areas where the metal detectors are located. The Port is just one municipality that has quietly conformed to Washington state’s firearms preemption statute.
The City of Seattle is frivolously appealing King County Superior Court Judge Catherine Shaffer’s order to stop enforcing a city gun ban by Feb. 17, and to take down the “No Guns” signs that were posted at parks and community centers around the Emerald City.
The Port of Seattle and Seattle relied on Cherry v Metro, a case where a Metro bus driver that brought a gun to work — and could be fired because he was not a member of the public. Thus, state preemption law did not apply. Under state preemption, local governments are not permitted to enforce any gun-related ordinances that are more restrictive than Washington’s state gun laws.
As a result, Snohomish County is reportedly dropping its restrictions on guns in parks. To their credit, Yakima, Federal Way and many other cities and counties did not wait to see whether some activist court would reinterpret the preemption statute!
Preemption encompasses anything that relates to the registration, licensing, possession, purchase, sale, acquisition, transfer, discharge and transportation of firearms, or any other element relating to firearms or parts thereof, including ammunition and reloader component. See RCW 9.41.290.
Last year, Federal Way’s City Council unanimously agreed with an opinion letter that we submitted in 2008. In January 2009, Federal Way amended its gun laws in accordance with state law.
Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels knew his edict violated state law; he earlier admitted in writing that he did not have authority to enact the restrictions on guns in the parks and other city property. He issued his decree without the Seattle City Council even voting on it.
Meanwhile, there is recognition by some King County Council members that the ordinance empowering the King County Executive to ban guns during an emergency violates state preemption. A federal statute imposes severe money damages in the event that state or local authorities confiscate weapons during an emergency.
The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule that state and local governments are subject to the Second Amendment. The case, McDonald v Chicago, will be decided in June — approximately two years after the landmark DC v Heller gun case.
Several states like Montana and Arizona have enacted Firearms Freedom laws to put the federal Leviathan on notice that the Tenth Amendment protects in-state commerce related to keeping and bearing arms and are battling the government in the courts. Additionally, a strong majority of state attorneys general have upheld their constitutional oaths by joining the McDonald v Chicago case.
But keep your eyes on the State Department, which quietly announced that the U.S. will begin taking steps toward signing the United Nations Small Arms Treaty. The biggest threat to the Constitution would be a widespread pattern of violence or threats of violence related to political turmoil. Sedition from the left or the right will subvert freedom more quickly than any ordinance, decree or treaty.
Permalink
