, , , , , , , , ,

Note who retweeted this anti-liberty tweet

“They that would surrender essential liberty for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” 

 Benjamin Franklin

March, 2020, the Coronavirus19 pandemic.  Once again, Americans find D/S/C politicians, including the D/S/C presidential heir apparent calling for the disarming of honest, law-abiding Americans. Simultaneously, police agencies across the nation, and not just in blue cities and states, are cutting back on arrests, apparently trying to minimize officer contacts with criminals and citizens alike.

Some police agencies are even asking criminals, pretty please, to quit committing crimes until everyone is feeling better.  Apparently thereafter, it’s OK to go back to business as usual.

Infamous Baltimore City Attorney Marilyn Mosby is not going to prosecute a wide range of crimes, including drug possession and dealing, and Baltimore’s clownish mayor Jack Young is begging crooks not to shoot so many people, so as to free up hospital beds for Coronavirus victims.  I’m sure the nation’s criminals, being altruistic, unselfish sorts, will take these pleas to heart—or not.  And Colorado legislators are doing their best to pass a gun lock up bill that would essentially disarm citizens in their own homes.  Criminals are being released from jails across the nation in the name of public health, but that’s just an excuse for what D/S/Cs have wanted to do anyway.  The mayors of several cities have given themselves, via executive order, dictatorial powers, including the power to disarm the law abiding.

Gun and ammunition sales, as they always do in times of crisis and when citizens get an inkling politicians want to disarm them, are skyrocketing.  This is so in response to reality.  It’s interesting that many first time gun owners are liberals, just as it was during the Obama years, and when it seemed Hillary Clinton, who promised to utterly destroy the Second Amendment, was a shoo-in for President.  I addressed liberal gun ownership back in 2014 for The Truth About Guns.

In times of crisis, the first thought of many politicians is to disarm the law-abiding, to make them instant criminals.  Actually, that’s pretty much their first thought all the time.  Celebrity Bill Maher—and a variety of others—have made fun of anyone wanting to arm themselves, observing one can’t shoot the virus.  That honest Americans may have to shoot criminals taking advantage of the virus is irrelevant to such people, though I’m sure(?) they understand the distinction.  It is not a coincidence that these politicians and celebrities are almost universally D/S/Cs.  Nor is it coincidental they live in gated, secured communities and enjoy armed protection.  Nor is it a coincidence they claim the police can protect everyone, knowing they cannot, and have no such legal duty.

credit: patch.com

The police are not, for the most part, expert with guns.  Most are just not gun guys and girls, and many own no weapons other than their issued handgun.  Many don’t even carry concealed off duty.  It’s an issue I explored in detail back in October of 2017.  You might like to take the link prior to continuing.

Back?  Good.  Let’s continue.  Let’s consider the reality of policing.  Most people would be actually–not faux–shocked to learn how few officers are patrolling the streets of their city at any time of the day or night.  To put three officers on the street over 24 hours, a police agency must hire at least four, so they can all have a day off occasionally, to say nothing of training, court appearances, sick time, etc.  Agencies are always understaffed, and staff most when the call volume is highest, which is usually weekend nights, beginning with Friday.  The fewest officers work during the day.

Let’s say your wife is home alone—you’re on a business trip—and at 0200 one night, she’s awakened to the unmistakable sound of someone breaking into your home.  Believing the police can and will protect you, you’re unarmed, and so is your wife.  The sequence of events will go something like this:

0156: That’s when the bad guys actually start breaking in.

0200: That’s when they get frustrated and don’t care about making noise, which wakes your wife.

0202: It takes her this long to wake, orient herself, and convince herself it’s really happening.

0204: She has hidden in a bathroom and locked the door. Fortunately, she remembered to bring her cell phone, and it is charged.

0205: She manages to dial 911, and actually gets a dispatcher.

0207: It takes this long for the dispatcher to calm her down and get a coherent story.

0208: The dispatcher sends several units to your home, keeping your wife on the line.

0213: The first officer arrives down the block from your home.  He will wait two minutes for his backup to arrive.

0215: The backup officer arrives, confers with the first officer, and they carefully approach your home, guns drawn.

0218: They find the smashed back door and carefully enter…

Are you getting the point, gentle readers?  The police love to catch bad guys in the act, but that’s rare.  For the most part, the police arrive after the damage has been done and conduct an investigation, and maybe, depending on the kind of crime, might make an arrest sometime in the future.

What happened to your wife?  Did the bad guys hear the police coming and run away?  Or did they get to her within minutes, preventing her from making a call?  Did the police catch them in the house, but with your wife as a hostage/bullet magnet between them?

Keep in mind, always, the police have no actual legally enforceable duty to protect anyone.  Not only that, they can’t be held liable if they fail to protect anyone.  The relevant case is Castlerock v. Gonzalez, and I wrote about it years ago for PJ Media.

Briefly, Jessica Gonzalez had a restraining order against her estranged husband.  He took her three young daughters out of her yard and fled with them.  She, over many hours, begged the Castlerock, CO police to find her daughters and enforce the restraining order, but they continually blew her off.  Finally, he attacked the police station, firing on it with a handgun.  The police finally did their duty and helped him commit suicide by cop.  Nearby, they found his pickup, and in it, the bodies of his daughters.  He murdered them hours earlier.

Jessica sued, and the case went all the way to the Supreme Court.  They ruled the police have a duty only to the public at large, not to any individual.  They have a duty to enforce the law, to deter crime by their presence and investigate it after the fact, nothing more.  They can’t be held liable for failing to protect any individual.

Sound outrageous?  It’s absolutely rational and necessary.  There are few police officers, many more criminals, and far, far more of us.  They can’t be everywhere at once, and the old axiom that when seconds count, the police are minutes away, is undeniably accurate.  What of rural areas, where the single deputy sheriff on duty will commonly be an hour or more away from a call for help?  In major cities, particularly those ruled by Democrats, police response time is best measured with a sundial.  Detroit has had an emergency call response time—when they answer 911 calls and respond at all—of nearly an hour.  Besides, who would become a police officer knowing they would be sued every day of the week?

The truth is the police cannot protect anyone, and have no general duty to do so.  Government has no conscience, and will never allow itself to be sued.  Government has only priorities and powers, and neither are focused on the individual.  D/S/C government is scornful of individual rights because those rights are limitations on its powers.  Thus do they wish to disarm the law-abiding, and care little for disarming criminals, who help keep normal Americans from complaining about them.  It’s a sort of Cloward-Piven strategy.  Keep the normals in chaos and they’ll be more likely to accept government handouts at the expense of their liberty.

Politicians know this.  They know no one can hold them responsible for their indifference to the welfare and lives of others.  All normal Americans can do is turn them out of office at the next election—if D/S/C election fraud allows it.  They know they’re not going to hold criminals responsible for their crimes, unless they’re so stupid as to victimize them.  They know exactly what will happen if they disarm the law-abiding, and they salivate at the prospect.

We’re on our own.  We are all responsible for defending our lives and the lives of those we love.  Refusing to recognize that reality and refusing to take the steps necessary to save lives does not change reality, because evil exists and it may confront anyone at any time and any place.

But what about AR-15s, or AR-14s, as Gropin’ Joe  Biden terms them?  He is sworn to take them away from the law-abiding, and is planning to use Beto O’Rourke to do it.

An AR-15, or similar rifle, might well be necessary to save lives, and it will surely be necessary if fake Hispanic Beto O’Rourke, or anyone like him, takes power.  Criminals will be emboldened, and more likely to commit hot “ burglaries—burglaries done where the criminals know people are at home.  Having the ability to engage multiple hostile targets can make the difference between life and death while the police are doing their best, given the variables of time, distance and traffic, to get to you, and that’s if the dispatcher didn’t get the address wrong, if the call didn’t get mislabeled or misplaced, and if you had time to call in the first place.

Ruger AR-556, a common AR-15 variant

D/S/Cs want to ban AR-15’s because they can trick people into thinking they’re scary and uniquely dangerous, actual machineguns.  They know if they can establish the precedent of banning any class of firearm, that’s the beginning of the end for citizen ownership of guns.  The fact that AR-15 or similar classes of weapons are very seldom used in any kind of crime is beside the point.  The point is always political power vs. individual liberty.  That’s why the founders wrote the Second Amendment, to ensure the proper balance.

Interesting, isn’t it, that whenever a crisis occurs, D/S/C’s eternal, knee-jerk response is to try to increase governmental power and decrease individual liberty.  Your guns—your lives—are in their way.  They care about public safety only in the abstract.  Your continued existence is a mere abstraction, a political talking point.  Government has no conscience, and will never allow you to sue them for failing to protect what is to them, an abstraction: your life and the lives of those you love.

That puts rather a different blush on their pretense to care about public safety, doesn’t it?  We’re on our own; we always have been.  The only thing different is now you know about it and are better prepared to deal with a crisis, even if it’s a manufactured crisis.