Guns: confiscation of legally held weapons in Germany will be next.


David Davis

UPDATE1:- On second thoughts, perhaps the poor tormented bugger was just deranged and so could not get a girlfriend like we even managed to do, despite being barking and turning into libertarians. See … Here.

…..But….why do the deranged always seem to have access to shagloads of guns? Does the presence of guns actually lead to mental derangement? I’d not have thought so, but I do not know. Do you?

David Davis

I almost can’t watch this saga any more – I really can’t. It’s like a tragic play, in which you always know what’s going to happen in the next scene, but you’re not sure where.

In one civilised Western nation after another, a multiple-fatal-shooting is staged, usually at a school (to maximise the parental anguish involved, and to mobilize a million mums, plus harden public opinion against “shooters”.) 

The Australians were clever: they did it at a popular tourist/beauty spot in Tasmania. The British rather overdid it at Dunblane, using a primary school (really gross, that – you could just about stomach the slaughter of secondary-school pupilas but not little kids, surely?) but I guess they were in a hurry to get all of absolutely everbody’s firearms before the 90s-Tories’ New Labour Project was to kick off properly.

Then, in more or less short-order, “legislation is enacted” to deprive one more section of the law-abiding community of all its guns – category by category, one at a time.

Of course, illegally-held weapons remain untouched. Some “security-theatre” about “amnesties” is staged, for effect, but produces little. In the meantime you can go to a pub in Catford, get to know certain people, and get a shooter, and some food if you’re rich, in the fullness of time, for a wad of cash. I expect this is still the case.

A totally-disarmed citizenry is a pre-requisite for a tyrannical government being able to entrench itself permanently – just look at the Third Reich, and Stalin’s USSR before that, its mirror.

At least the USA still has the Second Amendment, but for how long I wonder?

A libertarian wonders to what extent States are now prepared to go, via the public slaughter of (chiefly and on purpose)  children, to deprive citizens of all the world’s most civilised nations, of firearms. When will they start on kitchen-knives, I wonder, or angle-grinders, or power drills? Or chain-saws? (Perhaps that’s why you can now be fined for doing moderate electrical repairs in your house, like rewiring it yourself, or changing a window without certification….)

Why doesn’t this go on in Africa, which is bursting at the seams with guns? Or South America? Or Saudi-Arabia? Or Syria?

Why the first-world West? Can anybody help me here?

…and I think Mr Underclass quietly agrees with me, about my main hypothesis.

About these ads

27 responses to “Guns: confiscation of legally held weapons in Germany will be next.

  1. Is there much evidence to point to government complicity in Dunblane? I know they stuck a 100 year lock on the evidence which seemed ultra suspicious.

    You can guarantee that the shooter in this latest German case was on anti-depressants. They are always on anti-depressants. If you get into it deeply MK Ultra certainly pops up. Who knows when or if we will ever know the truth of these matters.

    • Perhaps the State “grooms” them first: and a course of antidepressants might also be needed “near the end-time”, to defocus the subject’s attention away from what is to happen to him.

  2. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article574012.ece

    Well I guess they at least allowed it to happen.

  3. “Staged”?

    Not doing much for libertarian credibility here.

  4. Pingback: Straight to the point « The Landed Underclass

  5. As to Dunblane, I hope that some people, somewhere, are working on what I’d have to dub “strong decryption”.

    For it will be certain that the guys hired to protect the reputations of whoever staged Dunblane, will be the best in the business. The amount of our tax money to be used on this is no object here.

    But we could always hope that some apparatchik might lose the keys, on a memory stick somewhere.

  6. I hate to not get in on the conspiratorial excitement here, but a deft swipe of Occam’s razor would suggest that a mad teenager shot some people because he was barmy. The Enemy will of course *use* this to advance their agenda of disarming populations, but that is because they are opportunists. They know if they wait long enough, an event will occur that they can use to their own ends. There’s no need to get into all this “black ops” stuff.

  7. To TPS:-

    This which you kindly flagged up:-

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article574012.ece

    does not imo pass the Occam’s Razor test.

    As Bernard Levin once said in another context,

    “It’s not what they can’t say: it’s the way they can’t say it.”

  8. Ian B, I’ve got to agree with you. The Enemy Class are opportunists, no these atrocities
    are not staged, and it does nothing for Libertarian credibility to suggest that they are.

    In one respect, David Davis, you are right. It has long been a major objective of the Enemy Class to disarm the law-abiding part of the general public in order to that they can bully and enslave us.

    (The reason for the Dunblane papers being locked up for a hundred years is probably to prevent embarassment to leading members of Scotland’s leftish establishment, because of what ever connection they had with Thomas Hamilton.)

  9. Now look here Ian, my dear old chap,

    57.92% of us who write or read this blog are barmy – not to say barking.

    All the world’s a bit queer, except you and me, and I have my doubts about you. But all of us here just don’t even contemplate the possibility that we’d go out one morning (it’s always the morning – I thought these people didn’t get up till 2pm?) and massacre a school?

    Nah. The structure’s too formulaic, each one is too derivative of the last one, and the results both mediawise and reactionwise are too similar, for it not to be following a plan.

    I predict France next. Then, the EU will “have to step in”. Better keep your children off school for a few years, or a decade, if you’re French.

  10. A pattern can be caused by many things. The pattern itself doesn’t prove a suggested causative agent.

    For instance, there’s an obvious explanation; copycatting. Once one nutty teenager has shot a bunch of children, the next nutty teenager will see it as more of a lifestyle option. It’s a spreading meme, effectively, like those American post office shootings that created their own catchphrase- “going postal”.

    Why would teenagers shoot up classrooms full of other teenagers. Anyone who has been to a school must be aware of why; they’re hell-holes. Not for everyone, but for some. They’re places of intense social conflict, artificial prison-like environments in which young people are forced together in an unnatural environment from which there is no escape. (I’ve just writted a comment over at Samizdata to similar effect- that the schools need closing down).

    We don’t need any other explanation than an angry, isolated teenager with access to guns tipping over the mental edge. Perhaps he became that way because of institutional schooling. We’ll never know.

    But why take the risk? Time to ban schools NOW.

  11. Come on Dave, listen to Ian and Otto. Conspiracy theories just associate us with the loony fringe.

    This is not to say that these shootings are not convenient to the ruling class – they’ll take any chance they get to pass more victim disarmament legislation.

  12. Read Robin Ramsay on the difference betwen “Conspiracy theorists” and “Conspiracy theories.”

    Otto: Your assertion that Officials never conspire is laughable! Politics IS “Conspiracy” writ large.

    How can it possibly NOT be?

    “A small tightly-knot group of politically-motivated men” was one of Harold Wilson’a descriptions, AFAICR!

    There is no “a priori” presumption of blanket guilt or innocence.

    The events of “0/11″ were obviously a conspiracy (or set of conspiracies). There is even an “official Conspiracy Theory”

    [ FX: "19 men with box-cutters onspired with some guy out there in a cave in Afghanistan and successfully hijacked four jetliners, flying three of them into their chosen targets. All the damage on 9/11 is explicable in terms of this Conspiracy." ]

    Do you believe that? Even if you do, is that a sufficient or necessary condition?

    If a madman asserts that “2+2=4″, is that assertion crazy? Does its’ truth-content have anything else to do with anything other than its testable correspondents to the facts?

    An assertion may still be true even if everyone in the world believes it to be false; and it may be false even though everyone in the world believes it to be true.

    “Knowldge” is that area wherein the two larger circles of ‘belief’ and ‘Truth’ oerlap. Whether you like that or not is completely irrelevant to the objective truth-content of objective knowledge.

    Tony

  13. Yes Tony, but the bit of relevant information you’ve left out of your analysis there is that you’re batshit insane.

  14. IanB:

    You mouth off:

    “Yes Tony, but the bit of relevant information you’ve left out of your analysis there is that you’re batshit insane.”

    So, you’re a _rude_ idiot to boot…

    My clinicians say that I am (quote):

    Perfectly sane; brilliantly intelligent; a really nice person; under great situational stress” (for which I have “pharmacological combat aromiring” developed just for me by the Head of Department at Bristol University.

    Opinions are free; but facts are sacred:

    If (and only if) you have the courage of your convictions, post me your email adddress for a Letter Before Action; and your address for service of all proceedings.

    (I can get these anyway, but it’s amusing to make you screw yourself).

    Then, I’ll throw you to my (warfighting) Lawyers, with instructions to progress the matter without further reference; and we’ll see how much money you will have once had.

    To libel someone “in their trade or calling” is a criminal offence: ask Sean…

    So you want to play?

    [ FX: "DO YOU, punk?" ]

    The sane thing to do is to run. Now. Keep right on running. Do not pass “GO!” Do not collect £200 …

    So now we really do get to see who’s “batshit insane” or not, IanB.

    Some of the proceeds will go to boost Libertarian Alliance funds…

    [ FX: "Taking down assholes for fun and profit for fifty years..." ]

    Bye Bye, IanB!

    Have a nice day…

    Tony

  15. Oh for heaven’s sake Tony. What the hell was that?

    Firstly, I haven’t got any money. Really. Not a bean. So hoping to enrich yourself at my expense is rather a waste of time.

    Neither is calling somebody a loony libel, nor actionable. Threatening to do so just makes you look, well… batshit insane.

    Thirdly, I admit it would be fun seeing you stand in court explaining that the US and UK governments are murdering their own citizens via black ops; that policemen and the secret services and lord knows who else are deliberately staging terrorist attacks. That’s a lot of folks you’re accusing of the most grotesque crimes, Tony. Libel? Actionable? Is the court going to support your assertion that it was unreasonable to describe that point of view as “batshit insane”?

    And this is liberty, is it? Threatening people with the courts? Oh, lolz.

    Stop making a goddamned fool of yourself.

  16. This is getting out of hand.

    If there’s any more malarkey about lawyers, and suing, I will delete the entire post together with t the comments.

    I do not do this stuff here, in my own time, for no pay, to get the LA seen as a haven for mountebanks.

    Tony, if you have “warfighting lawyers”, why aren’t Bush and Clinton and Blair in prison?

    You also said:
    (I can get these anyway, but it’s amusing to make you screw yourself).

    I don’t find that sort of personal threat at all amusing on my blog. There will be no more.

  17. Ian B:

    So you woulsd like to see all this hashed out in Court? Geat!

    So post your email and/or snailmail addresses; and I’ll instruct my Lawyers accordingly.

    See you in Court, sunshine.

    “And this is liberty, is it? Threatening people with the courts?”

    Absolutely, Ian B: English Common Law is Rothbardian Law writ large.

    Taking all this to the Courts will be a public service…

    Just think — you’ll be ‘famous’…

    For 15 whole minutes…

    Regards,

    Anthony H. Hollick

    Warfighter

    ———— * * * * * ————

    PS: Better check that you qualify for Legal Aid right now, Ian B…

    ———— * * * * * ————

    “Cet animal est mechant!

    Quand on l’attaque, il se defend!”

    ———— * * * * * ————

  18. I don’t think you read my comment, above, Tony?

  19. Sorry Tony, but I am not aware that I asserted that officials never conspire.

    For example, Britain’s entry in to the EU involved a degree of conspiracy by certain politicians and senior civil servants to keep the true nature of the project from the British public. (Wasn’t the Attorney General’s advice kept from members of the cabinet?)

    Much that is labelled as conspiracy is not actually conspiracy. People with similar world views and similar interests act in ways that benefit each other for reasons other than an immediate pay off or direct request. Merely knowing that it will help your side or undermine your enemies may be enough.

    For example, I don’t think the Clinton White House would have needed to ask the main TV networks to hold back news of fresh rape allegations against Bill Clinton until after his impeachment vote. (see Christopher Hitchens’ book “No one left to lie to – the triangulation of William Jefferson Clinton”)

    In this vein, Hillaire Belloc wrote a humorous little verse about not needing to bribe the British journalist given what he would do unbribed.

  20. Dave:

    “I don’t think you read my comment, above, Tony?”

    [ FX: ]

    Never mind! The “Wayback” machines keep all of them, even when they’re deleted or ‘vaped.’

    When my messages “disappear” I usually just post them again.

    In “CensorWatch.”

    [ FX: "Blocking Internet messages is like trying to get piss out of a swimming-pool." ]

    (Smiles…)

    BTW: Where’s Ian B disappeared to?

    Best,

    Tony

  21. Interesting news item:

    “Interior Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble told Reuters he saw no need to tighten gun controls further after the shooting.

    “We shouldn’t think about tougher laws all the time, but think about what we can change in society,” he said.”

    Maybe Dawn is coming…

    Tony

  22. Hope you’re tight, Tony. (I meant right, sorry,)

    I expect IanB will turn up sometime, don’t fret.

  23. Dave,

    In fact, I don’t drink, except for an occasional cut-glass tumbler of iced Bailey’s, or a glass of chilled sweet white wine (Lambrusco is nice with salads on a picnic at the Zoo).

    I have a “Hot Stones” massage booked for 1 o/clock; and this evening I meet my girl friend to give her a full-body aromatherapy massage with warm scented oils… (Smiles):

    She looks EXACTLY like Sandahl Bergman in “Conan the Barbarian.”

    She’s Czech, with the body of a gymnast, the grace of a dancer (which she is) and an all-over bronzed suntan. Fair hair and dark green eyes. 28… (Smiles)

    Best,

    Tony

    [ FX: "Do you want to live forever?" ]

    http://www.fantastic-voyage.net

    Come and see!

  24. Tony, it was just a misprint!

  25. You’re very fortunate to have such a girlfriend, Tony.

    Not my taste really – perhaps that’s fortunate. I prefer rather small brunettes. (I’ve got one, don’t worry on my account…..)

  26. Pingback: Shootings at schools: last week it was Germany. This week? France….and what did I say? « The Libertarian Alliance: BLOG