Reconquista, Terrorism, and Gun Control

Occasionally I hear someone who is otherwise very
bright

say
that the world might be a better place if
there were no weapons.
It wouldn`t.

All was not sweetness and light before the invention
of firearms. The Norman Invasions, the Golden Horde, the
Destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, and the Fall of
the Roman Empire all happened while we were waiting for
Sam Colt to come along and invent the revolver.

It was firearms technology that finally made the West
safe from Islam in the eighteenth century, after twelve
centuries of being in constant danger of being overrun.
The same technology helped Westerners prevail over
savages in the conquest of North and South America. It`s
a good thing, as Martha Stewart would say.

But a lot of people want to abolish guns.

Do you realize that if you made all the guns in the
U. S. vanish, New Mexico, Texas, and California would
vanish the same day?

The Mexicans would just come and get them.

(It`s much easier to invade the US from Mexico than
the other way around, because the US has paved roads.)

Now many gun control fans are saying, "Don`t be
silly. The U. S. Army would still have its guns.
We`re not talking about making those guns vanish."

But what if the US government doesn`t want to rescue
you? They may want to trade Southwestern "land for
peace," or make "reparations" to the Mexicans. They may
even want to do "land reform."

The government`s policy today tends to prevent
Americans from defending themselves, and the government
will always fail to defend you.

It will even prosecute you if you defend yourself, as
in the Goetz case and countless others less famous.

In 1999 a Border Patrolman was

fired
for using an airgun to sink a rubber
raft that was crossing the river into the US. More
recently, they`ve been searching pilots to make sure
they don`t have pocketknives or scissors.

There`s a movement to

arm pilots
, and even to allow

ordinary Americans
to carry guns on planes, but the
average liberal

panics
at the thought.

In a recent

column
, John
O`Sullivan argues persuasively that the precautions
worked very well, limiting the Arabs to boxcutters
rather than pistols and hand grenades.

He `s got a point. But the search at the airplane
gates still adds up to one thing; 300 disarmed
passengers vs. 6 armed hijackers. The government made
sure
of the first part, and failed on the second
part, nor did they provide an armed guard to prevent
hijacking.

(A Brinks truck has three men in it, and they`re
usually guarding less than a quarter of a million
dollars in cash. A 767 is worth $125,000,000, let alone
the cost of replacing the passengers, but still
doesn`t have any armed guards.)

New York, the site of the 9/11 attacks, has the worst
"victim disarmament" laws in the country. You could
start firing a pistol into any large group of New
Yorkers and be fairly sure none of them could fire back.

In an earlier attack in 1997, a Palestinian named Ali
Hassan Abu Kamal did just that. He opened fire on the
top deck of the Empire State Building. Giuliani

called for
Floridians to disarm themselves, getting
it exactly backward.

In New York City, Amadou Diallo was shot by police on
the mistaken belief that he was pointing a gun at them.

Ann Coulter

wrote
that the police weren`t just out

"profiling"
; they were looking for a specific
criminal who was armed with an automatic pistol
and a submachine-gun, and who had committed 51 rapes.
Two months after the mistaken shooting of Diallo, they
caught this man, to absolutely no publicity.

But while Coulter is right about the NYPD`s good
intentions in rousting Diallo, she`s temporarily
overlooked their role in the 51 rapes.

NYPD has

programs
to make sure all the women in New York are
unarmed. Every rape after the first one was the fault of
the NYPD.

I wrote

earlier
that it would be stupid to disarm the
populace during an

invasion
. It`s even dumber to do so during a war.

So when the Administration proposes a new
anti-terrorist bill, instead of including new and better
ways to control Americans` access to firearms, perhaps
they should try the reverse, and write legislation
overriding New York`s

Sullivan law
, and the thousands of mini-Sullivans
around the country, and require the state and city
governments to let people defend themselves.

Vin Suprynowicz, a pro-gun writer in Nevada,

put it
this way: 

The entire epitaph of the
independent, indigenous cultures of North America may be
summed up in the two syllables of the first

Indian war chief

ever to face a European cannon: "Uh-oh."

Let`s see how that translates into Arabic.

October 17, 2001