The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJohn Derbyshire Archive
Why Bitter Whites “Cling” to Guns–Even MORE Bitter Black People
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
whitemales-661x372

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

I got a smile or two out of this March 14th piece in Scientific American, title: Why Are White Men Stockpiling Guns? Subtitle: “Research suggests it’s largely because they’re anxious about their ability to protect their families, insecure about their place in the job market and beset by racial fears.” [By Jeremy Adam Smith,March 14, 2018]

Scientific American is impeccably CultMarx-compliant, so I wasn’t very surprised to find them telling me that keen interest in guns is a white-guy thing “rooted in fear and vulnerability” and “racial anxiety.”

Uh-huh. While I was smiling, though, I couldn’t help thinking that the author, for all his PC sociobabble and the dubious “studies” he cites, is likely on to something. Two very distinctive things about the U.S.A. among other Western nations are, one, lots of us are really keen to own guns, and two, we have a big old sub-population of blacks. Might not the two things be connected?

If you are a gun-lover, you can speak for yourself. I’m one, and I’ll speak for my-self. Possibly I’m a lone eccentric, a demographic of one, but here goes anyway.

I don’t have a lot of faith in the stability and permanence of our civilization. Perhaps I have less faith than most. In my formative years I read a lot of science fiction, including post-apocalyptic stories about the world following a nuclear holocaust, a great plague, a worldwide famine, a catastrophic earthquake … You name it. For making your adolescent flesh crawl, there was nothing like mid-20th-century post-apocalyptic sci-fi.

It didn’t help that one of my schoolmasters, a teacher of English with an enthusiasm for Anglo-Saxon verse, introduced us to that poem where the poet finds himself among the ruins of a Roman town and wonders what the heck happened to it all.

So I live at a level of anxiety — a low level: I’m not neurotic about it, not enough to be a real Prepper — that I could wake up one morning to find the fragile fabric of civilization turned to dust overnight like Tutankhamun’s shroud.

I’d like to think that if that happened I could survive long enough to get myself and my family to some friendly group dedicated to collective survival. I’ll be looking for a community I can join for mutual protection. Lone Preppers, it seems to me, are going to be easy targets.

Targets for whom? Well, if we collapse into a state of nature, a lot of people will be doing what I’m doing: Looking for a community to join, for the safety of me and my family. Some other people, however, will go feral. They’ll be looking to survive too, and their preferred method will be to kill me and take whatever I’ve got.

If I spot a group of strangers on the post-apocalyptic road, how will I know which category they fall into — folk like myself looking for safety in numbers, or feral predators?

ORDER IT NOW

It’s a sad thing to say, and disagree if you like, but I think race will be a major clue. We know how inner-city blacks behave among themselves. We know the statistics of Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, New Orleans, St. Louis. We know about Nat Turner’s uprising and the massacres in Haiti. When blacks confront whites in a state of nature, race vengeance is on the table.

You may say race vengeance is justified, given the cruelties and indignities of the past. Probably you are right. I’m looking to survive, though. When some feral black has a knife to my child’s throat, the fact that he may have some historical justification for his feelings will not be a factor in my decision-making. If I’m armed, I’ll shoot the guy. If I’m not armed, I’m out of luck, and so is the kid.

I’m exploring the dark depths of the white American psyche here. Or possibly they’re just the dark depths of my psyche, I don’t know. By all means email in and tell me.

I do believe, and the Scientific American article, in its guarded, condescending, and roundabout way I think confirms, that one reason we white Americans love our guns so much is fear of blacks, and of what might ensue if the restraints of law and civilization were to fall away.

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Ideology, Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Blacks, Gun Control, Guns 
Hide 167 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Kent says:

    U mad?

    I’ve been in this game for years, it made me an animal
    There’s rules to this s*ht, I wrote me a manual
    A step-by-step booklet for you to get
    Your game on track, not your wig pushed back

    Rule Nombre Uno: never let no one know
    How much dough you hold cause you know
    The cheddar breed jealousy especially
    If that man fcked up, get your ass stuck up

    Number 2: never let ‘em know your next move
    Don’t you know Bad Boys move in silence and violence?
    Take it from your highness
    I done squeezed mad clips at these cats for they bricks and chips

    Number 3: never trust nobody
    Your moms’ll set that ass up, properly gassed up
    Hoodied and masked up, shit, for that fast buck
    She be laying in the bushes to light that ass up

    Number 4: I know you heard this before
    “Never get high on your own supply”

    Number 5: never sell no crack where you rest at
    I don’t care if they want a ounce, tell ‘em “bounce!”

    Number 6: that g*ddamn credit? Dead it
    You think a crackhead paying you back, sht forget it!

    7: this rule is so underrated
    Keep your family and business completely separated
    Money and blood don’t mix like two dicks and no bitch
    Find yourself in serious shit

    Number 8: never keep no weight on you!
    Them cats that squeeze your guns can hold jums too

    Number 9 shoulda been Number 1 to me:
    If you ain’t gettin’ bagged stay the fck from police
    If ni**as think you snitchin’ they ain’t trying to listen
    They be sittin’ in your kitchen, waiting to start hittin’

    Number 10: a strong word called “consignment”
    Strictly for live men, not for freshmen
    If you ain’t got the clientele, say “hell no!”
    Cause they gon’ want they money rain sleet hail snow

    Follow these rules you’ll have mad bread to break up
    If not, 24 years on the wake up
    Slug hit your temple, watch your frame shake up
    Caretaker did your makeup, when you passed
    Your girl hit my man Jake up
    Heard in three weeks she sniffed a whole half of cake up
    Heard she suck a good d*ck, and can hook a steak up
    Gotta go gotta go, more pies to bake up, word up

  2. Kent says:

    Most white people don’t need a dumbass like you as a spokesperson.

    Maybe you should start listening to rap music, you could learn a lot about hood lifestyle that’s creeping up on your overprivileged ass. Your spoiled white ass won’t last a week though.

    Kneeling yet?

  3. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:

    Poll: which aspect of this race pimping column is the worst?

    1. Its general theme that, all things being black & white, race is his stereotypical reader’s ticket to “collective survival.”

    OR

    2. This little petunia in the onion patch: “You may say race vengeance is justified, given the cruelties and indignities of the past. Probably you are right.”

    I may not recall the author correctly, but didn’t Mr. Derbyshire recently write publicly to remind himself that he was too good to associate with the “latrine flies” at an event a few years back?

    Anyway, “Derb’s” more than willing to take a clickbait dump for a living.

    And now the comments can pile up….

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @Jesse James
    , @SMK
  4. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous

    Well, not recently, but yes, that was Mr. Derbyshire on July 31, 2007. And thanks to the search engine, I just learned that he apparently likes using the word “latrine.”

  5. Let me guess, Derbs:

    • Replies: @forgottenpseudonym
  6. Maybe some of us White guys just LOVE a well-oiled machine:

  7. Avalanche says:

    Bingo. You’re right precisely on target, Derb! Sooooo many brainwashed Whites, STILL believing that “they’re just like us except skin color” — thanks to the TV/media/schools/pols lying and lying and lying…

    But please –instead of hoping that AFTER it all burns down you can go “find a like-minded community”: build one now! Start carefully sorting and educating your neighbors and friends (family is usually unreachable — ask me how I know) — wake them up! Turn them ‘slightly survivalist’ (to start) — you can start with: we need to be prepared for hurricanes, earthquakes, (the oncoming ice age — and baby it IS coming! Read the actual science, not the propaganda!)… oh, and the race war that’s simmering but not yet hot on our side! Get them to start thinking about how insanely easy it is to ‘shut down the grid’ — there has already been a ‘proof of concept’ trial in CA — a rifle, the coolant system, and the power plant shuts itself down! (IF you’re lucky! Dyah live near a nuke plant? Oops.)

    If you don’t (metaphorically — or actually!) buy your lanterns, batteries, food-and-water, and plywood sheets before the hurricane comes ashore, you’re not getting any then! (Oh, and guns. You and they definitely need guns and ammo — you won’t be getting any when the flag goes up!

    DON’T WASTE TIME! (We don’t have all that much left!)

  8. Randal says:

    You may say race vengeance is justified, given the cruelties and indignities of the past. Probably you are right.

    No, they aren’t, and there’s nothing to be gained by pandering to that nonsense even in jest.

    Nor is there any apparent need to resort to post-apocalyptic fantasies to propose a link between race realism and gun support, given the bald statistics showing dramatically higher rates of criminal violence and aggression amongst blacks, and the clear and increasing prevalence of politically and culturally whipped up race resentment amongst blacks. If you have a gun, you have a chance of defending your life, family, home and property against any criminal attack. If you don’t, then you are essentially helpless if you are outweaponed, outnumbered or even just outmuscled and you are basically living your life just hoping you don’t get targeted (or just ignoring the risks). That’s the day to day reality of life for most people in gun control countries. The risks are low, given basic precautions, but they are ever present.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @RadicalCenter
  9. anonymous[117] • Disclaimer says:

    Anyone who lives in close proximity to Huntington Station (or Brentwood, or Bay Shore, or Gordon Heights) is perfectly justified in owning a gun. These have been semi-”no-go” areas for whites for a long time. But Mr. Derbyshire, I must disagree , not with what you say, but the way you say it. You could make the same point about the need for self-protection in societal collapse without ever mentioning race. Not to tell war stories, but my former (white) neighbors in mid-Suffolk County really were like a family of alley cats…I have no doubt that if given free rein, they would immediately go feral.

    As far as listening to rap music, Mr. Kent, anyone who lives in the NY metropolitan area hears it on and off all day long from passing cars, and in the gym. It is amazingly vile and offensive, kind of like someone belligerently poking you in the chest with a finger. I have no doubt that it is meant to be so, both by the performer, and by the rap fan.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @Da Wei
    , @grapesoda
  10. The restraints of law and civilization have been falling away, episodically, more frequently and in longer episodes, all of my adult life. Black violence has been increasing in frequency and intensity all of my adult life. So, whatever the motive of the Scient. Amer. author, his assessment is accurate. And even the children now know and worry about the fragility of our society. Even diehard liberals see these facts and hypocritically acquire real weaponry. It’s nice of Mr. Derbyshire to state the matter politely, while braced for the s— to hit the fan.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  11. There need not be a wholesale civilizational collapse. Just think LA in 1992 or the aftermath of Katrina–you are likely to be on your own for up to 72 hours or more. Being armed is a reasonable precaution.

  12. “Scientific American is impeccably CultMarx-compliant.”

    If this is true, then the apocalypse has already happened.

    • Replies: @Macon Richardson
  13. @Kent

    Keep talking trash. That and taking advantage of the weak is all you know how to do.

  14. Hubbub says:

    The problem with liberals is that they don’t know what they don’t know – or they willfully ignore what they see and hear.

  15. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @anonymous

    “You could make the same point about the need for self-protection in societal collapse without ever mentioning race.”

    But not as much money. Race pimping pays.

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
  16. David says:

    Derb, I have the complete works of Trollope in nice old volumes and two fireplaces, one for you and yours, one for me and mine. Off grid. Southern Vermont. Lots of guns (if too little ammo). Let me know when you need a safe house.

    Speaking of Barsetshire, that hater Angela Thirkell wrote this hateful paragraph in Enter Sir Robert (1955):

    Owing to a totalitarian war in which many thousands of lives were lost and a generation sorely depleted, the population of England was larger than ever. Where it all came from, Hatch End did not know, nor do we. Perhaps some kind of explanation lies in the fact that far too many people, having tasted the sweets of freedom at our expense, preferred to go on doing so; also that the children of Dark Rosaleen…, found good wages under the Saxon oppressor well worth an exile from Erin; that our dusky brethren from Africa and the West Indies and elsewhere prefer our climate and our increasing bureaucratic tyranny to their own; that we are, in fact, what Imperial Rome was, and if the Orontes does not flow into the Tiber here, rivers from every less agreeable part of the world are flowing like anything into the Thames, the Forth, and even the Rising.

  17. No. I think your fear while a bit premature and over wrought has salience. And my fears are not from roving blacks. It’s from roving liberals. The actual level of violence statically among inner city populations has always been higher according to urban incomes — even when blacks were out of the question as slaves, that was accurate. The same fears concerning inner city populations could found in pen and paper. So color while a convenient marker is only that a marker. If i am going to use a marker and history, it’s going to be whites who are going to be the most dangerous and said dangerous via their belief in their own superiority and righteousness in using violence to get their way. It won’t have anything to do with moral rebalance but merely as right, say the Jews who behave and think in like manner in Palestine. They will be the most dangerous and the least cooperative. The tendency of whites to violate agreed upon standards and contracts is well documented. And they will even use God to justify it. So whiteness, class, nationality . . . the old standbys — will be far more cause to violence.

    It was the whites in Louisiana who used violence to block the route of others seeking safety, they just happened to blacks at the end of their use of force. No coincidence this. Historically, the evidence is overwhelming that as to social incident — white are far more volatile. There are just few if any instances of blacks moving into full blown riot mode because a white person moved into the neighborhood. But the record is pretty clear that a black person walking on the beach is enough to send whites into a rage. So I would tend to leave color out of this equation.

    That aside, I think there is ample reason to be concerned. But until the election of President Trump, I never grasped how prescient the end might be. The reaction to his candidacy was the first time in my life that an involuntary “social fear” escaped my lips. And it was not him, it was the intensity of the public seeming opposition. it was the violence of it, the language of it. And note from the general public as well as the vehement opposition among elites — that violence in language and deed came from whites. I began the hunt for gas, masks, rations, locations of safety and how to get there. What routes to take from the house to get there if the car doesn’t work. How much water need I carry. Maybe I should already be plotting out safe water locations and bury water containers now, just in case. I am really ticked of my housemate will not learn to use a weapon — it really bothers me, partly because in a crisis such as social disorder, she will be a burden as opposed to a help. And while just friends, I feel put upon to protect her. In a crisis, my chivalry may cost me my life. I resent that. So no, I don’t think your concerns are not entirely unreasoned. Maybe your fear of blacks is over the top because as most of the people you will run into will be whites – 80%+. You will encounter more people with resources at a hyper state to get more and keep what they have. Considering how whites have managed the country, I think you can guess who those threats will be if one wants to hyperventilate about color dynamics.

    Nat Turner responded to slavery, not merely being white. If you happen to have any slaves, you might want to consider setting them free before the apocalypse. Consider the life and response of free blacks to whites by far the story of Robert Smalls is the standard for most blacks.

    This may be a bridge to far for your emotional state —-

    if one is for accuracy, even the “Black Panthers” were not about making violent war on whites.

    I would consider a greater threat those who might head north from the southern border.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  18. American hoplophilia isn’t just down to fear of blacks, though that obviously plays a role.

    They’re romanticized as instrumental in the American Revolution and the story of the frontier and the Old West.

    Beyond that guns are fun and cool. There’s a case for regulation, though as we know our enemies act in bad faith and simply hate and fear guns (and us). A lot of people like guns for the same reason they like pickup trucks and muscle cars.

    Bear in mind that blacks are a small fraction of the population. The real enemy is someone else, who is of course allied with the blacks.

    Granted, that population share could change quite quickly in light of The World’s Most Important Graph™.

    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
    , @Gleimhart
  19. @anonymous

    But not as much money. Race pimping pays.

    Get with the program or get off this site, cuck.

    Race is real.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  20. Da Wei says:
    @anonymous

    A belligerent finger poked in your chest. That’s a damn fitting analogy for cacophonous rap music. Thank you!

    You just articulated and clarified something I’ve felt for a long time.

    Nothing’s more infuriating than some asshole who has it over on you enough to poke your chest. Few things are more cherished than our memorable experiences of musical art. Rap, that shit excuse for music hyped by the whored-out media, is not intended to uplift or inspire, but to intimidate, belittle, demean. It’s one more way our traditional culture has been trashed. Pisses me off.

    A finger poked in your chest, it is. Could anything make you swing on a guy faster than that?

    Thanks for the image.

    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
  21. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    So you’re really programmed?

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
  22. @stillstein

    Violence in nearly every category (nearly) is down as a trend across the nation despite the end of stop and frisk in some municipalities.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
  23. The difference between the now-and-then “gun control” is that the MSM & Handgun Control, Inc. (also the National Coalition to Ban Handguns) stated that they “only” wanted your handguns and not your rifles (Note that shotguns were conspicuously left out, presumably so that Joe Biden could poke the barrel out the window and fire two shots.). And OH! did they put on a mighty show for decades; handguns were not protected by the Second Amendment, handguns were the tools of crime, handguns for poor people shouldn’t exist (Look at the massive attack against the Raven .25ACP pistol and similar zinc-castings, because they were affordable. “Ring of Fire” was the pejorative against the gun makers.), “Saturday Night Specials” even got their own pop song from some nitwit band and in Illinois, SC, Minn., HI we even got an anti-SNS law forbidding weapons that didn’t meet a certain melting point on the cast frame. Then they decided that modern materials like plastics, uh, “polymer” were of a criminal nature because they could get past an airport X-ray screen (Note that they backed off when the police started adopting Glocks), and then finally, since cops were getting Kevlar vests, you, the ordinary civilian had no right to purchase or manufacture AP ammunition for your pistol to shoot some criminal, government or private, breaking into your home.

    All of that was under the rubic of “controlling crime.”

    But then Handgun Control, Inc. decided to mark off Uzi carbines, AKs and AR-15s as encompassing the focus of evil as well.

    That is the new era for gun control, or excuse me, let us use the NEW venacular, “Gun Reforms.” Because freedom is always in need of “Reforms” to the MSM/Gun Controller.

    Semi-automatic rifles like AR-15s give you the combat power of a soldier. Everything the gun controllers have worked toward is make us as helpless as an Australian and Englishman. First gun in my household ever was an No. 4 Enfield; one of the first pistols I ever shot was Webley .455 Automatic Mark 1, a weapon dating back to 1912. The number of these weapons in the UK in private hands probably quite small due to legislation over the last 100 years. Only about a half-million non-shotgun firearms in private hands apparently.

    Right now, an AR-15 is more than just a gun. It’s a political symbol that is feared by the powers that be.

    https://intelnews.org/2016/06/14/01-1918/

    Former CIA, NSA directors, retired generals, launch gun control group

    http://www.skepticfiles.org/weird/gunctlar.htm

    Gun Control Lobby: Made in the CIA

    Right now, there are great bargains in ARs. The gun makers ramped up their production before the presidential election and so there are many being offered. Get someone interested and have them purchase one. Go get trained in how to properly use one (Project Appleseed – RWVA.org – Revolutionary War Veteran’s Association.)

    And don’t forget to download and read US Army field manuals for basic infantry skills.

    https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/

    Why?

    https://warontherocks.com/2018/02/shock-of-the-mundane-the-dangerous-diffusion-of-basic-infantry-tactics/

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  24. “I don’t have a lot of faith in the stability and permanence of our civilization. Perhaps I have less faith than most.” Of course, by importing a Chinese woman and having Chinese offspring, you’ve destroyed your part of civilization. Your Chinese daughter loves hip hop and voted for Obummer. After Muslim mass shooters in the USA, Asians are second. We definitely need guns to protect ourselves from the likes of you and your family.

  25. @Jim Christian

    Correction.
    You meant ‘Is it cos I is black?’
    (Of course the original author meant ‘is it because I’m of Jewish descent?’, but he doesn’t say that).

  26. Has nothing to do with blacks, although the (((media))) constantly stirring the pot is concerning. I am more concerned about our “leaders” in DC than our black brothers and neighbors.
    Bolshevik revolution could happen again, 2nd amendment may make them think twice about trying it here.
    I would encourage blacks to arm themselves too, nothing wrong with that.
    Look at the ones pushing for disarming the public. Coincidence? I think not.

  27. @anonymous

    So you’re really programmed?

    I am deprogrammed. The very word “racism” is only a century old, which is why in George Orwell’s writings he refers to “color feeling”. The idea that there was something immoral about making empirical observations about other races and translating these observations into policy would’ve surprised your ancestors.

    Race was the basis of US naturalization law from 1790-1952, being restricted to whites of “good moral character”. This was further upheld by Supreme Court rulings.

    Strangely, neither the Founding Fathers nor their descendants found anything immoral about this. The only reason the law was changed was due to the Cold War, and both Presidents Truman (who signed this legislation) and Eisenhower (who considered appointing Earl Warren SCOTUS Chief Justice his greatest mistake) felt that the country should stay white and explicitly said so.

    http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19911103&slug=1314805

    But I am strongly of the opinion Negroes ought to be in Africa, yellow men in Asia and white men in Europe and America.

    -Harry S. Truman

    http://www.blacksandpresidency.com/dwighteisenhower.php

    Southerners “are not bad people. All they are concerned about is to see that their sweet little girls are not required to sit in school alongside some big overgrown Negroes.”

    -Dwight Eisenhower

    The idea that racism is wrong stems from the left, and I will not accept their Satanic religion nor allow them to dictate their morality to me. As someone who strongly supports the scientific method, I will also not allow their Satanic religion to obscure what is empirically true.

    Do you think it’s some kind of coincidence that everywhere in the New World whites settled that racist policies were ultimately adopted? Do you consider Malays to be “race pimps”? How about Israelis?

    Race is real, and you certainly will not convince other races that it is not with absurd arguments about “race pimps” or “color blindness”–let alone the fanatical white SJWs who would send you to a concentration camp if they got the chance.

    If you want a good idea of what happens when racism is abandoned by white states once we no longer have a preponderance of numbers, take a good hard like at the fate of white people in Zimbabwe (Rhodesia) and South Africa.

    I suppose you think the Afrikaners should just tell the ANC to stop being “race pimps”?

    Or, closer to our own shores, Haiti.

  28. Anonymous[784] • Disclaimer says:

    In this multi-cult society it’s an unfortunate fact that the various groups don’t trust one another. When seconds count the police are minutes away, that is, if they even come at all. When riots and other out of the ordinary events occur the police all disappear for the next few days at least. You’re on your own. Gun control is something of an elite thing anyway and they’re the ones hyping it. Elites don’t trust their own people and are paranoid about the common folk being armed. The safety of the masses is of no importance, only that of the elite. It’s weird to see Hollywood types come out against guns when they’ve spent years brandishing them in their movies.

  29. In a post apocalyptic scenario a firearm might indeed be useful in ensuring that one could secure a good parking spot and a shopping cart for looting Trader Joe’s, but also for hunting.

    I understand that at one time squirrels formed a large part of the American protein diet, so I would not fancy their chances too much. In fact, once they are gone, I would not be surprised if cannibalism were to make a comeback.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  30. I will add that the media/politicians have had whites blaming and fighting blacks and vice versa at least since the 60′s.
    Where has it gotten us? Either side.
    Why do you think they want us to fight each other? Keeps you eyes off of them.
    Time for a new strategy, don’t you think?

    • Replies: @Thorfinnsson
  31. anarchyst says:

    The 1957 and 1964 “civil-rights” acts revoked our right to “freedom of association” (only for whites) and replaced it with government-backed, and forced “public accommodation”. Try selling your house only to someone of your own race. Try renting an apartment or house only to someone of your own race…you will be shut down, if there is even an inkling of “discrimination” against a “protected” minority…
    This unconstitutional behavior by government has gotten worse, with moslems, homosexuals, and soon, pedophiles becoming a part of the “protected” classes…since “civil-rights” laws DO NOT APPLY to white males. Our esteemed head of the so-called Justice Department’s (actually “just us”) “civil-rights” division has stated as such…
    Us white males have become third-class citizens in our own country. It would seem, that since whites are only 6% of the world’s population, we would be a part of the MOST protected class on the planet. Of course, that will never happen. Voluntary segregation is the only answer.
    The solution to the “real estate” problem is for a large landowner to offer parcels of land in a “trust” arrangement. This keeps the government out of the decision of WHO may purchase and enjoy the land. This is but one way to keep “undesirables” out without running afoul of the misguided “fair housing” laws…
    Us whites will have to come up with solutions on our own OUTSIDE of government control or intervention…

  32. “When blacks confront whites in a state of nature, race vengeance is on the table.”

    Those of us in racially diverse areas know this to be true. A lot of black vengeance is taken out on white women. Knowing how to use a firearm is common sense.

    “You may say race vengeance is justified, given the cruelties and indignities of the past. Probably you are right.”

    This is foolish. If you take this to heart it will cloud your judgment, and slow your reaction. Most blacks, men and women, are unwitting agents of chaos. They will laugh as they murder you and your loved ones.

    • Replies: @Truth
  33. anarchyst says:

    I grew up during the first “civil rights” era and observed firsthand what the “civil rights (for some)” movement has wrought.
    I lived in a decent Detroit neighborhood that began to “change”. At first, there was “no problem” with the few black families that moved in. However, things got progressively worse. If you had a nice bike, you had to be aware of two blacks riding on one bike. The black riding the handlebars would jump off, knock you off your bike and take it. Quite often they only lived a block or two away. The stolen bike would be visible. Calling the cops was futile as they would say “possession is nine-tenths of the law”. The kids and their PARENTS would actually DARE the white parents to “come and take it back” (if you can).
    Advance to a number of years to when I was on my own. .I was always a Detroit supporter . . .
    I still subscribed to the (mistaken) notion that most blacks were decent people, had decent black neighbors, was friendly with them, helped them when needed and generally had pleasant neighborly relations with them.
    I had an old car that I fixed up to near showroom condition. I used to park it in my driveway to work on it or wash or wax it.
    My neighbor’s relatives came to visit. Two of the “teenagers” saw my car in the driveway and proceeded to sit on the hood, scratching the paint. My request for them to get off was met with f— you. Upon talking to my “nice” neighbors, their response was that “boys will be boys” and to “let it go”. Although I remained pleasant to my “neighbors”, things were never the same. After a rash of break-ins and vandalism, a number of them by the same “teenagers”, I finally gave up on Detroit and close friendship with blacks.
    Improving “race relations” was always a “one-way street”–whites giving up freedom of association and the right to live with our own kind and restrictive real estate agreements (covenants) while seeing blacks and their criminal behavior destroy everything they touch.

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
  34. TheJester says:

    Our real vulnerability is our very efficient “just in time” economy. As we know from hurricanes, the grocery shelves are empty in three days. In the face of natural disaster or societal collapse, our urban areas with millions of people will be starving within three days.

    Hunger can turn the best of people into feral dogs regardless of race. Some makeshift self-defense collectives will have food … and some will not. The latter will demand their fair share from the former. If not, they will try to take it all by force. Race won’t matter unless the have-nots are Black. Yes, based on experience, they can’t be trusted. Whites assume the worst of these people as an alien and hostile population. They will unite against them.

    In the larger picture, a more realistic scenario is that faced by the Romans at the fall of their empire in the 5th Century and the Soviets with the threat of starvation in their newly industrialized cities in the 1930s. With starvation staring them in the face, the Romans and Soviets systematically invaded and pillaged rural areas to feed the cities. They brooked no quarter. Everything edible was stolen. Deprived of their grains and livestock, the rural areas starved; people died. This is the sense of the Ukranian Holodomor.

    Hence, my take is that the threat of societal collapse (somewhat inevitable) will pit Whites and Blacks against each other in the cities … and urban areas against rural areas in the rest of the country. The latter will be the real contest for survival: where is the food and who has it? By comparison, the urban wars between Whites and Blacks and other minorities will be fights over crumbs.

    I’m at an impasse. I’m a “son of the prairie” living in Northern Virginia. Given current trends, I believe that societal collapse is inevitable. I have people to protect. I’m far enough down the track of being a survivalist to be a member of the NRA. I don’t yet own an assault rifle (or a close derivative), but I’m shopping them. I’m retired military and know how to use one.

    When the societal implosion occurs, it will be likened to a “nation-wide” hurricane: empty grocery shelves; hungry people; thieves and criminals on the make; urban areas organizing against rural areas.

    Those who can defend themselves will. Those who cannot are toast. I won’t wager outcomes. It will be a free-for-all. I’m willing to die fighting to protect my own. That’s the measure of a man.

  35. @EliteCommInc.

    Fine. But the statistics that matter most in this case are the levels of black on white crime versus white on black crime. The rape numbers are especially grotesque.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  36. eah says:
    @eah

    • Replies: @eah
  37. @redmudhooch

    I will add that the media/politicians have had whites blaming and fighting blacks and vice versa at least since the 60′s.
    Where has it gotten us? Either side.
    Why do you think they want us to fight each other? Keeps you eyes off of them.
    Time for a new strategy, don’t you think?

    Black-white racial tensions aren’t something that just emerged in the 1960s.

    There used to be white-led race riots such as Detroit in 1943 and even nationwide in 1919.

    D.W. Griffith’s 1915 film Birth of a Nation was a romanticized tale of the Ku Klux Klan “redeeming” the South from black rule (as well as black rapists).

    It’s not specific to America either. Haiti massacred all whites unable to flee immediately after independence. Colonies in Africa which were never even exposed to the transatlantic slave trade also had racial tensions, such as the Mau Mau Uprising in British Kenya.

    The blacks are not well served either by our present system, but I no longer particularly care about them. They’re a fundamentally criminal and parasitic race which can only function in civilization under substantial repression and authoritarianism.

    Ultimately they’re not worth focusing on too much as they’re incapable of organization. The real enemy, as always, is liberals.

    • Replies: @Truth
  38. I agree with the contention that the main motivation for American gun ownership is fear, not of government, but of other Americans, especially African-Americans, but I also agree that Derbyshire needs to put more work and variety into his regular effusions.

  39. Jamie_NYC says:

    Here in Charlotte we had race riots a couple of years ago (the downtown area was the only one affected, fortunately). Shop windows broken, people beat up for no reason other than they were white. The reason: a black cop shot and killed a black criminal with a yard-long rap sheet. I’m not kidding. What will happen in the future if there is a general breakdown in order? What if there is a bigger reason for a riot, such as a black leader being assassinated by a white person, or an election outcome that is ‘unacceptable’ to blacks?

    To get a sense of degree of delusion that people on the left live in, take a look at Quora questions related to law and order. The top voted answer to a question whether a person needs a firearm for home protection cites his case (I believe in Australia), where it turned out that the people doing the break-in in the middle of the night were neighbor’s teenagers, and the police was there in two minutes. That, according to Quora readers, is all you need to worry about, so having a gun for home protection is madness.

  40. peterAUS says:
    @Randal

    Agree.

    As for

    If you don’t, then you are essentially helpless if you are outweaponed, outnumbered or even just outmuscled and you are basically living your life just hoping you don’t get targeted (or just ignoring the risks). That’s the day to day reality of life for most people in gun control countries. The risks are low, given basic precautions, but they are ever present.

    well, yes and no.
    It’s also harder for “them” to have firearms too.

    Boils down to: single you vs couple of them all with guns or all without guns.
    So….not quite better/worse in each case.

    I guess that in each environment the best “weapon” is simply being switched on all the time.

    And, on top of it The Law.
    US police, first and foremost.

    So, in “disarmed” countries, well, it’s not that bad as Americans would like the rest of the World to believe in.

  41. peterAUS says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    Good post.

    Now, a funny part.

    “Them” vs “us” violence.
    In this article and most of the comments so far and I am sure in future it will be blacks vs whites, in that order.

    Now, how about real world examples:
    Rwanda.
    Balkans.
    Color wise I mean.
    Especially the Balkans: ethnic cleansing, concentration camps, summary executions….all managed not by mobs but by a State.
    From lists to pickup squads, transport to camps…all the way to digger crews.
    So….yeah……

  42. @Kent

    No need to listen to garbage to know what the hoodrat is about. We’ve had them pegged for decades. Everybody whines about the Jim Crow years, no one ever asks why there was segregation in the south. White southerners already knew what they were dealing with.

  43. anarchyst says:

    It turns out that those whites of the 1950′s (myself included) that protested against forced integration were right, all along.
    Blacks were doing much better when they had their own institutions, businesses, social organizations, residential areas, etc.
    It was communists and other society destroyers (the chosen and other northern-based carpetbaggers) who are directly responsible for our present racial and social ills.
    I grew up during the first civil-rights era and have a decidedly different take on this whole civil-rights movement era. In fact, I saw for myself, what went on during those turbulent times.\par
    Despite the lies and fabrications by the so-called mainstream media the civil-rights marches in the South were not peaceful gatherings that were met with dogs and fire hoses, but were violent black confrontations that actually set back the cause\ of TRUE civil-rights . .
    The so-called civil-rights demonstrations were waves of lawlessness that disrupted the lives of peaceful citizens. There were many black citizens in these areas that were against these outsiders coming there to cause trouble. These civil-rights marchers committed crimes, rapes, robberies and other crimes, and trashed the areas they were protesting in. I WAS THERE . . . Of course, the cameras were turned off during the episodes of violence. . .then just as now, the news media could not let a crisis go to waste . . .\par
    It was mostly ACLU, $PLC and ADL types that riled things up. . .and then later on melted into the woodwork only to become civil-rights\ attorneys, race hustlers and poverty pimps.\par
    One incident comes to mind the death of Mrs. Viola Liuzzo. Mrs. Liuzzo was a Detroit housewife who traveled to the deep south (without her husband) to run around with black freedom riders at night. This was a recipe that was asking for trouble. What business did she have running around with blacks at night in the South while she had a family in Detroit?? Why did she put herself in harms way ??
    I WAS THERE during the civil-rights disturbances and witnessed the misbehavior of these civil-rights groups (that never got reported).
    Of course, the victors write the history. To the victors–how does it feel now that those you pushed and supported are now turning on you??
    The so-called news media had an agenda then as it does now. White-on black crime (although relatively rare) is ALWAYS described as a hate crime where as black-on-white crime is NEVER described as a hate crime . . .Actually, ALL crimes are hate crimes . .

  44. anonymous[784] • Disclaimer says:
    @anarchyst

    One incident comes to mind the death of Mrs. Viola Liuzzo

    FBI informant and agent provocateur Gary Thomas Rowe was in the car from which the shots came that killed Liuzzo. He was the one who allegedly egged the others on and may even have been the one who actually shot her. Check it out.

  45. @Kent

    What is it with people like you and ‘asses’?

    Why do you like bottoms so much?

  46. @anarchyst

    Good comment and interesting report, thanks for sharing. I’m a millennial with immigrant parents and thus have zero connection to this. Like everyone else I got the standard narrative in school.

    American Renaissance has written a number of pieces about what really happened.

    I learned from them that the march from Selma ended with the black civil rights protesters urinating on the Alabama Statehouse.

    Libel laws were apparently watered down because of civil rights as well. Southern public officials who found themselves libeled by the press launched libel lawsuits. As a result “public figures” lost their protection from libel.

    It seems that Southern resistance failed as the Southern capitalist class did not require segregation the way their ancestors required slavery.

    The President of Coca Cola, Robert Woodruff, gave a speech to Atlanta business leaders at the Piedmont Driving Club in 1956 in which he stated that integration was coming whether they wanted it or not. He noted that it was in their collective interests not to resist.

    Woodruff went on to promote a dinner honoring Martin Luther King in 1964 after King received the Nobel Peace Prize (for destroying racial peace).

  47. @anarchyst

    An acquaintance working in a hospital recounts the story of an MD who lived in Chicago. He accidentally left his garage door open and his Black neighbor went inside and stole one of bikes. He only found out about this when a neighbor who lived across the street informed him of what happened.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  48. McTosh says: • Website

    Whites of America see:
    >Whites being genocided in Rhodesia
    >Whites being genocided in South Africa
    >Whites being genocided in Germany
    >Whites being genocided in France
    >Whites being genocided in Sweden
    >Whites being genocided in UK
    >600,000+ white children get gang-raped and slaughtered by rape jihad terrorist cells across the UK but it’s the parents and victims that get arrested and go to jail for “hate speech” if they try to report it
    >Go to jail for having an opinion
    >Go to jail for telling jokes with your pug

    T’is indeed a mystery why whites of America would want to keep their guns. it’s almost as if they think every country that brings in gun control ends in violence, tyranny and bloodshed or something. :thinking:

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  49. @Joe Stalin

    Thank you, Joe, for that well-encompassing comment on the gun controllers. I am an NRA member, and long-term reader of their mags in addition to the rest of the damn internet, so I’m aware, but you summed up well how these hoplophobic scum operate.

    My only one quibble with your post is the use of the term “nitwit band” to describe the great Lynyrd Skynyrd. I just cannot countenance that (using my big-kid vocabulary tonight ;-}

    Let me print out half the lyrics, just to try to show that I don’t think this was a “take away the guns” song, but more like just commentary/warning about drinking mixed with guns, and maybe some “woke-up” racial aspect too:

    Two feet they come a creepin’
    like a black cat do,
    and two bodies are layin’ naked,
    a creeper think he got nothin’ to lose.
    So he creeps into this house, yeah
    and unlocks the door.
    and as a man’s reaching for his trousers,
    shoots him full of thirty-eight holes.
    Mr. Saturday night special,
    got a barrel that’s blue and cold.
    Ain’t good for nothin’
    but put a man six feet in a hole.

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
  50. @McTosh

    T’is indeed a mystery why whites of America would want to keep their guns. it’s almost as if they think every country that brings in gun control ends in violence, tyranny and bloodshed or something. :thinking:

    Yep, the real reason for the 2nd Amendment, not duck hunting, nor even self-defense, is becoming clearer and clearer to Americans. Though this article concentrated on rightful concerns about safety during SHTF, Mr. Derbyshire seems to be hip to that last aspect too, as he and other VDare writers have been writing about the Orwellian Police State of formerly-Great formerly-Britain.

    Maybe we’ll even have Mr. Mason clued in. Keep reading, Jonathan, if you’re not careful, you may learn something. [/Fat Albert]

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  51. @Achmed E. Newman

    Okay on Mr. Skynyrd. I’ve only heard it in bits and pieces on radio.

  52. @Jonathan Mason

    As the ZeroHedgers would say “Go long long pig”.

    (You are right that the abundant wildlife existing in the current US, including more deer than people in lots of states, would not last for long during TEOTWAWKI. The math on this is easy.)

  53. peterAUS says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Yep, the real reason for the 2nd Amendment, not duck hunting, nor even self-defense, is becoming clearer and clearer to Americans.

    I am not so sure about that.
    My impression is that majority of people into the 2nd are for self-defense , say, 50 %, a bit less for hunting, say, 40 % and the rest 10 % altogether are gun enthusiasts, preppers and those into that real reason.
    Just my impression.

    And, probably the worst of all that, even those into the 2nd are into ideas of rural guerrilla warfare or “me and my friends against THEM”.

    I’d say that’s delusional, but I could be and hopefully I am wrong.
    Just, well, have some idea how armed citizens vs State worked, recently, somewhere else. Like Ukraine, for example.

    So….hopefully, as far as Americans are concerned, they don’t need that method and those experiences.
    Which method could that be, well, for me, is still a mystery.
    I guess it will stay that way for quite some time, or at least for the next 20 years. After that I won’t care, probably.

    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
  54. Yan Shen says:

    Well I’ve never understood why Americans loved their guns so much. It must all stem from that entire ordeal where we had to fight against the British for our independence and freedom back in the day or something, and having the right to bear arms was a crucial part of our ability to defend ourselves. That and the uh frontier mentality of Americans as they progressively moved westward across the country.

    I’m always been curious about Mr. Derbyshire’s love of guns, given that he every so often seems to suggest that we should become more like Japan as a country. Given that East Asians hate, hate hate guns, in the same manner that Whiskey would argue that uh white women hate hate hate beta males, touting one’s support for the right to bear arms hardly seems like something that would nudge us closer in the direction of being like the Japanese. Now I certainly think that the harsh stance East Asians take towards gun ownership is the result rather than the cause of cultural propensities towards good behavior and non-violence, but I can’t help but question why so many people in America love their guns and think the solution to preventing anything bad from happening is to arm us all and turn the entire country into an escalating arms race.

    I do believe, and the Scientific American article, in its guarded, condescending, and roundabout way I think confirms, that one reason we white Americans love our guns so much is fear of blacks, and of what might ensue if the restraints of law and civilization were to fall away.

    Well I’ll be the first to admit that when I’m walking through some shady part of whatever city I’m in where certain demographics may be a bit more prevalent, I’m definitely a bit more cautious than usual. I don’t know if my fear instinct goes much further than that though. I mean uh I’m certainly not ready to put on Kevlar and pack my AK-47, as Mr. Derbyshire seems to insinuate he or other whites might be ready to do. Of course, both Mr. Derbyshire and myself benefit from the fact that we don’t live in the worst inner city ghettos where people literally will get shot daily for no real reason. And thank goodness!

    In that respect, Mr. Derbyshire’s constant fear mongering does seem a bit strange given that he grew up in the UK and today most likely lives somewhere upper class in the US, where most of his neighbors are probably white or Asian. Does he actually encounter ghetto blacks on a normal basis in his life? Why all of this moral posturing over something that probably has very little effect on one’s own sphere of existence?

    Even given the obvious over-representation of blacks among violent crime offenders in this country, the idea that black Americans are naturally pining for some sort of retributive race war does seem to be a bit of an exaggeration in my opinion. No doubt Mr. Derbyshire will point to the crackdown against whites in places like South Africa or Zimbabwe as proof of his point of view. Maybe, but I’m uh significantly less convinced that this line of thinking holds much relevance for the US, Ferguson style protests aside.

    Perhaps uh one of the best quotes I’ve read about Mr. Derbyshire in recent years that I think might explain where much of his thought processes come from. Time for that genius award from the MacArthur committee Derb! :)

    Suppose you were a white person with a deep-seated dislike for black people, and you were intent on training your son to feel the same way. Suppose that, day after day, week after week, you instructed him to study the details of every instance of black-on-white crime. Say you advised your son to extrapolate from these incidents the notion that black people are generally dangerous, and that your zeal to present him with disturbing anecdotes along these lines never waned.

    You would be wrong, in just about every possible way: statistically, sociologically, morally. You would be doing your son a gross and damaging disservice. For yourself you would invite, and earn, broad contempt. If your opinions became publicly known, you might well find yourself unwelcome in polite company and your job at risk. Indeed, the National Review contributor John Derbyshire was fired for expressing such sentiments in a blog post three years ago.

    And yet for harboring roughly the same level of suspicion, fear, mistrust, distaste, and unease about whites as Derbyshire does about blacks, the essayist and blogger Ta-Nehisi Coates has found himself crowned America’s leading civic thinker.

  55. Truth says:

    When some feral black has a knife to my child’s throat,

    Well one of the many times that happened, Derb, it was a net benefit to Derb Jr. I mean, it did get his candy-rear into the military, didn’t it?

  56. Truth says:
    @SunBakedSuburb

    Those of us in racially diverse areas know this to be true. A lot of black vengeance is taken out on white women.

    Oh come on now, Sunny, I mean, white women tend to find creative and lucrative ways to get over this, it is the white men that have issues with it…

  57. @Kent

    I think you responded to the wrong piece. Doesn’t this belong over in Sailor’s post about “What is the difference between a Frat and a Gang?”

    Derb wants to join a frat, an association of like minded people who want to protect themselves from the predatory behavior of gangs, your kind of people.

  58. @Da Wei

    A single finger is one of the most vulnerable parts of the human anatomy, which is why grabbing and bending a finger is outlawed in wrestling and also why many Judoka tape two or three fingers together.

    When someone pokes you in the chest with his finger, immediately reach up and grab it and bend it backwards with all your might. This will achieve two things. You will disable the person by putting them in a lot of pain and metaphorically drive them to their knees as they attempt to prevent damage to their finger. From there, you can decide whether to escalate your assault or back off, depending whether they’ve had enough.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  59. Try this says:

    Derb, you might find this book helpful when forming your community after The Fall.

    https://www.amazon.com/Walking-Wisconsin-Nathan-Bissonette-ebook/dp/B06XVJ35SW

  60. @PiltdownMan

    Indeed, the apocalypse has already happened. Perhaps it hasn’t reached your neighborhood yet.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
  61. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:
    @ThreeCranes

    Gee, thanks.

    9/21/61: good example of a quickly degrading comment thread.

    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
  62. @Macon Richardson

    I haven’t picked up a copy of Scientific American in the last few decades, but was a subscriber in the 1970s. It was a stronghold of rational, dispassionate, hard science articles with no cant or ideological slant.

    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
    , @Ingot9455
  63. @Thorfinnsson

    There’s a case for regulation

    No, no there isn’t.

    • Agree: Twodees Partain
  64. @peterAUS

    Petey, you know nothing about Americans or firearms. Just quit commenting on these subjects. Stick to your war game wet dreams.

  65. @SunBakedSuburb

    Not today, not yesterday and not 100 years ago has the motive for crimes involving a white victim and a black person ever exceeded the number of criminal offenses by whites on blacks as color being the motive. It doesn’t even reach the standard of “pales in comparison”.

    Motive is the issue not merely the crime.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
  66. nsa says:

    In the event of a widespread societal breakdown, those of us with sizable rural properties face a lot worse scenarios than having to shoot up the cockroaches fleeing their urban nests……like our worthless relatives and in-laws showing up in their RVs for an extended stay.

  67. @Kent

    I commend you for high effort trolling. Well done – hopefully you wrote the entire rap yourself.

  68. Incidentally: not a prepper, but I keep a small stockpile of nonperishable food, water, blankets, medicine, etc. I always figure that it can come useful in a time of emergency, and a lot more small emergencies happen than one assumes.

    Its probably the result of playing too many rogue-like games, but I hate to be the one just to add to the tally of Yet Another Stupid Death(car broke down in the snow, no cellular reception, froze to death, gg).

  69. @anonymous

    You’re pointing a finger at me, but not poking me in the chest. I don’t care what you say, just don’t touch me in an aggressive way. For this I grant you permission to live another day on this earth. You’re welcome.

  70. @PiltdownMan

    True that. And its history serves as a prognosis for what will happen to National Geographic.

  71. @Chris Mallory

    True, Chris. Thor ain’t from ’round here, so he doesn’t quite get it. I’m going to give him time to learn, because even in a flock of sheep, there is a ram or two.

  72. @anonymous

    The US-UK-FRA Post WWII Neo-leftistbrainwashing that makes American whites unable to discern right from wrong and dismiss the media and Neo-liberal US government attacks upon the white race, western culture, literature, history and freedom to associate in the US is embodied in your post. Thank you for the reminder.

  73. Truth says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    The blacks are not well served either by our present system, but I no longer particularly care about them.

    Well that’s a little odd, considering you reference them in every post.

  74. Anon[418] • Disclaimer says:

    Great points Derb! There is an interesting ( and I think maybe Irish) low budget movie on Netflix entitled ‘The Survivalist’ you might find watchable. The bad guys are white though.

  75. Ingot9455 says:
    @PiltdownMan

    That was a very long long time ago. Times have changed.

  76. @EliteCommInc.

    The past is always important when considering the present, but your response is stuck in the sixties. The paradigm has shifted. Blacks have power in culture, media, and politics. It’s time to stop giving them a pass.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  77. Jeff77450 says:

    I’m 59 and I also read a lot of post-apocalyptic fiction in my teens & twenties, to include some on John’s list. I’ve served in seven third-world dystopias, four of them Islamic visions of what can only be described as Hell on Earth.

    I didn’t read the book but the movie _The Postman_ strikes me as a fairly realistic depiction of what post-apocalyptic America might look like (where the destruction isn’t complete & total, as depicted in _The Road_). I’m quite serious when I say that I don’t want to survive any kind of apocalypse.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  78. Truth says:

    Hey Derb, the champ disagrees.

    • Replies: @Liberty Mike
  79. MarkinPNW says:
    @Chris Mallory

    Isn’t a regulated gun one that hits what its sights are aimed at? Especially double-barreled rifles?

    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
  80. @Yan Shen

    “Given that East Asians hate, hate hate guns, in the same manner that Whiskey would argue that uh white women hate hate hate beta males,[...]”

    Is that right? My take is a basic ambivalence due to a non-socialization of East Asians to firearms unless someone introduces them, like taking them hunting or target shooting. It’s really easy to get them interested in firearms as mechanically interesting devices. And once they become interested, it’s Katy bar the door. Asians learn to love guns quite easily. After all, look at the whole plethora of Airsoft-type realistic looking weapons in Asia.

    Of course, the most famous use private firearms by Asians was during the Los Angeles 199os when Koreans fought NAMs in the streets. Youtube has a few videos on that:

    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
  81. unit472 says:

    I got to peer into the abyss when hurricane Irma approached Florida last year. I have to have kidney dialysis and since my clinic in Sarasota had no back up generator and the nearest one that did was in Venice ( then predicted to be near ground zero) I decided to head to Sarasota Memorial Hospital early Sunday morning to see if I could get dialyzed then in case my scheduled treatment on Monday wasn’t possible.

    I explained the situation to the ER nurses and they were understanding and admitted me. Then I saw others begin to stream into the ER complaining of various maladies. As I lay in my room waiting to go to dialysis the police presence increased. People were seeking shelter at the hospital because it had back up power and would be the safest place to be in case the hurricane was severe.

    A doctor then came in and told me she would do a blood test and if my potassium levels were not at danger level she would have me sent to a public shelter. I was expendable even though they had unused dialysis machines! I said to hell with that and got in my 4×4 and went back to my hurricane shuttered house and readied my Honda generator.

    • Replies: @Luxeternae
  82. @Truth

    “support on this amazing cause…”

    LOL

  83. @MarkinPNW

    That was the first definition, but I doubt it was the one being used.

  84. @Joe Stalin

    Deporting the Asians and closing the borders to them would be better than teaching them to like weapons.

    • Replies: @Jesse James
    , @Joe Stalin
  85. peterAUS says:
    @Jeff77450

    I could say I had a certain experience in living, for some time, in rather dystopian environment.
    So, when you say:

    I’m quite serious when I say that I don’t want to survive any kind of apocalypse.

    no offense, I think it’s an old age talking. I do share the sentiment now.

    BUT, then and there, not really.
    Complex motivation, but, still……

    Young men in their prime, of a certain type, could find that environment….acceptable.

    Of course, depends on the level.
    Post nuclear war, don’t think anyone could like that.
    Post,say, political-economic collapse…….yes.
    An opportunity, actually. An opportunity….

  86. @SunBakedSuburb

    It doesn’t matter whether blacks have ultimate power or no power.

    When it comes to acts of violence for the motive of color —-

    There’s no comparison. Though I thoroughly comprehend why you’d prefer to examine the last twenty years —

    No dice. Your comment was open ended. I prefer to take history as history

    Yesterday, today, five years ago, ten years ago, twenty years ago, eighty years ago or 160 years ago.

    The issue is motive. I am keenly aware that the first hate crime law was used against a black person — that’s ironic.

    Hmmmmm . . . I certainly hope nothing in my comments reflects support for criminal behavior. I don’t think so.

    • Disagree: RadicalCenter
  87. @Chris Mallory

    The US’ productive class whites would have even less of a buffer against the open border Latinos and violence-prone low-IQ blacks. Who would be in the high school math and science project teams if Asians are kept out?

  88. @Chris Mallory

    Just off the bat, Kahr firearms designer is the son of the Korean Rev. Moon. He not only makes the Kahr handguns, he also makes the Auto Ordnance Thompsons, M1911s and M-1 Carbines too.

    Leapers aka UTG (“Under The Gun”) is run by a former Taiwanese cop. He makes stuff here as well.

    SureFire weaponlights are made by some Korean dude.

    Asians already like guns. As a practical matter, getting them over to “The Dark Side” of arms ownership I think is doable. Any Asian living in a Black neighborhood has already been subjected to criminal attack, and thus ripe for separating from the “Coalition of the Fringes.”

  89. @unit472

    Do you think they would have run you through for cash? Over here in Orlando the medical profession is all about getting or being guaranteed payment. No service if any risk off third party payor denying a claim.

    • Replies: @unit472
  90. unit472 says:
    @Luxeternae

    I had private insurance and would have paid cash if that was the issue. It isn’t though. Hospitals are bureaucratic rules based institutions. Florida was under a ‘state of emergency’ so the rules were no admissions that were not immediately life threatening even if they had the capacity.

  91. KenH says:

    White people should be stocking up on guns and ammo. And not just any guns but so called “assault weapons” like the AK-47 or AR15. Both rifles are capable of scattering marauding bands of blacks and browns and even criminally inclined whites if the SHTF.

    Anyone who thinks the local and state authorities will protect us only needs to look at what transpired in Charlottesville and the assaults suffered by Trump supporters at campaign rallies. It will become increasingly common for any white people to the right of Barack Obama to not be accorded the protection of law, especially in states and localities controlled by radical left wing Democrats.

    A war or words is being waged on whites which could quickly escalate into a physical war. The average white person can’t get through the day anymore without being lectured by TV talking heads and brainless boogies about “white privilege” when most are living paycheck to paycheck and have had their neighborhoods invaded by the detritus of the third world. This is leading to seething white resentment and itchy trigger fingers.

    Paul Craig Roberts is correct when he posits that whites are being set up for genocide. This is why the left is fanatically and desperately trying to institute a so called “assault” weapons ban since they’re most effective for resisting government tyranny and killing tyrants both inside and outside of government. Their goal is to deprive their enemy, the deplorables, the most effective firearms for resisting their evil and genocidal plans

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
    , @peterAUS
  92. @Yan Shen

    I don’t know if my fear instinct goes much further than that though. I mean uh I’m certainly not ready to put on Kevlar and pack my AK-47, as Mr. Derbyshire seems to insinuate he or other whites might be ready to do.

    You are a fucking idiot who has never had real experience with real criminality, regardless of color. I hope that your family will never have to depend on you to defend them.

    • Replies: @Truth
  93. @KenH

    As you keep in mind that most of the people who have been challenging pvt gun ownership are white.

    https://www.dailywire.com/news/19161/poll-majority-blacks-favor-gun-ownership-aaron-bandler

    Based on the above article blacks are not interested in taking your gun.

    • Replies: @KenH
  94. @Daniel Chieh

    Kent works for the United States Government. Kent is trolling you (plural).

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  95. peterAUS says:
    @KenH

    This is why the left is fanatically and desperately trying to institute a so called “assault” weapons ban since they’re most effective for resisting government tyranny and killing tyrants both inside and outside of government

    That’s one way to look at it. Most people believe that.

    There is another. A tiny minority believes that.
    “Assault” rifles are the most effective for what they’ve been designed for:to enable a combatant to engage light skinned targets from ranges of 100 to 400 meters. For other ranges, for the same targets, different “tools” are preferable.

    As for the complex topic of “resisting government tyranny” those weapons could be useful.
    Could.
    If used by a relatively large group of people, working competently together and in a certain environment (mostly likely urban).
    The same group of people would also have to have an access to other “tools”, plenty of ammunition and implement some tricks requiring expertise and time.

    As for “killing tyrants both inside and outside of government” some would argue that other “tools” would be preferable.
    From handguns to long range snipers. Probably some devices that do “boom” too.Etc.
    The “biggest Evil ever to walk the Earth” was supposed to be terminated by a bomb in a suitcase. The Colonel preferred that to Stg-44.
    The “great President” was also terminated by a sniper. Was it old 6.5×52mm Carcano Model 91/38 or something else doesn’t matter. Wasn’t AK-47.
    Another President was shot by Röhm RG-14 .22LR revolver.

    Anyway.

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
  96. t-gordon says:

    Ignore the hype, the infinite hypotheses, endless shades of hyperbole, hypocrisy and hysteria surrounding gun ownership in America. This is all indicative of a society in collapse. Beneath the veneer of stability and routine that is daily life in America is a pretty rowdy undercurrent that will be much easier to navigate if and when things do get nasty. For those on a budget, a few less meals at FeedMe Inc. could pay for the purchase of a dependable handgun, shotgun and rifle. Every law abiding home should have one of each. No need to be extravagant. 9mm, 12ga. and 5.56 are readily available at the moment. Acquire a basic mechanical familiarization as well. Even if the chaos subsides or they show up to take them away for your own good of course ( being the law abiding citizen that you are, you’ll hand them over with a sigh and a smile…), well…what have you got to lose.

  97. TheBoom says:

    One doesn’t need to look and further than what happened to whites in Rhodesia and now in South Africa to see the wisdom in Derb’ s observations. A visual stroll through statistics on violent crime by race in the US, especially cross racial rape and murder, show that the African scenarios are not farfetched when applied to the US once whites become a minority. Whites are delusional if they don’t think they will need to band together and defend themselves once we get a US leader like Zuma who sings the US version of “Kill the farmer, kill the Boer” and his followers do just that.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  98. @Charles Erwin Wilson II

    Tragically, I learned that he just copied and pasted the lyrics from a rap song and did not actually put in the time :(

  99. Cato says:
    @Kent

    Dude, you sound like some pasty-faced teenager, squirreled away in his bedroom with a computer. Or, maybe more likely, you sound like some old guy, so jealous of youth that he really would like to sound like a teenager.

  100. deschutes says:

    The author Derbyshire is a sad, fucked up racist person. The comments section is filled with white racist shit and scum, consumed with hatred of blacks, hiding in their basements which are filled with assault rifles and ordnance.

    You are all a bunch of very sad, fucked up people. If there is armageddon you will probably be the first to die because your fucked up mindset only hates and mistrusts on the basis of race, so you will start attacking others around you for no apparent reason (except that they are black).

    Cooperation, getting along, adapting are impossible for such racist swine as you.

  101. KenH says:
    @EliteCommInc.

    As you keep in mind that most of the people who have been challenging pvt gun ownership are white.

    And all the people who’ve been protecting and defending private gun ownership are white.

    Jewish money, mostly from Michael Bloomberg and George Soros, is fueling the the gun control and “the second amendment is obsolete” narrative and movements. They know they need white gentile faces to push this for them and are making it worthwhile financially to join the ranks of anti-gunners. Little boss Hogg is the latest white goy to be recruited and given a pre-written script to read for the cameras while giving the communist salute at the recent rally.

    Based on the above article blacks are not interested in taking your gun.

    You come to a sweeping conclusion based on one article and one poll? Sure. blacks seem to support nebulous “gun ownership” by a slim margin according to one poll but it doesn’t say whether they think that includes so called assault weapons. But blacks also continue to support gun grabbing Democrat politicians at the national level by 90%. Every black politician in my state has been sponsoring sweeping gun control legislation and most stupidly blame the NRA for gun deaths in the black community when the black shooters invariably obtain their guns illegally.

    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  102. @deschutes

    If the Balkans was any guide, “assholes” survive SHTF very well.

    • Replies: @deschutes
  103. RudyM says:

    Protesters set up what amount to racial checkpoints in Sacramento. Police do not intervene:

    As of 2010, Sacramento was 14.6% African-American.

    • Replies: @Truth
  104. @deschutes

    It couldn’t be your rage and resentment that has driven the whites you despise into their basements, could it? Maybe they’re afraid of you and don’t want to venture out without a gun.

    And then, reflecting on their sorry state, they realize that they hadn’t always had to live this way, having to fear going out onto the streets of their own cities and, reflecting thus, ask themselves why? How could this have come to pass?

    And the answer is you. You are why whites can’t live a normal and good life. And your dirty little secret is that you’re proud of that. You relish their fear and revel in the sense of power it gives you to know that decent people have to go out of their way and adjust their lives to you. It makes you feel significant.

    It’s pathetic, but its the best you’ve got going for you.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  105. @Randal

    Risk of being raped or otherwise violently attacked is certainly NOT low any longer in much of England, France, Germany, Sweden, Belgium, Netherlands, and Italy, now that those countries have large disproportionately younger-male populations of hostile Muslims and Africans living among them. Those are all gun-control countries, and the people are paying a much higher price for that now, too.

  106. deschutes says:
    @Daniel Chieh

    Step back and look at the USA of the last 30 or so years in terms of gun violence. From Columbine, up to the most recent FL mass shooting, the USA is the ONLY country which has this self-inflicted epidemic of gun violence of Americans killing Americans by the dozens, by the hundreds, etc.

    Mr Chieh: you live in a very fucked up country my friend. You can go ahead and act all cowboy, and spout off about how well you will do in an actual breakdown of civil society where you will be John Wayne Jr kicking ass with your Winchester .33, but you know what? In that scenario, you will inevitably be killed by others with more on their side, better weapons, better logistics etc.

    You are in denial if you think that mass shootings every week/every month/etc are an acceptable way of life in USA. And your solution mr cowboy? Arming teachers with guns? LOL! Then you’ll have students bringing guns into the classroom to kill the teacher, etc. Arming everybody to the teeth will invariably lead to even more killings, it is obvious: especially given the unusually high number of really dumb, drug addled, backwards redneck, angry white dumbfucks that make up in very large part the cohort of the USA.

    Good luck John Wayne jr. You will need it. I feel sorry for you and your country :-(

  107. peterAUS says:
    @ThreeCranes

    Cooperation, getting along, adapting are impossible for such racist swine as you.

    with

    …our dirty little secret is that you’re proud of that. You relish their fear and revel in the sense of power it gives you to know that decent people have to go out of their way and adjust their lives to you. It makes you feel significant.

    as long as the power of the State supports that.
    Now….if/when that power weakens, so all that pent up rage boils out in the open, from BOTH sides….hehe…what could go wrong there.

    After seeing something like that (or so I say) somewhere else, once upon a time, I can’t help but keep wondering what level of bestiality the civilized West could descend to.
    Which side will organize the crews better, with faster output and smoother operation? Re mass graves.

  108. @peterAUS

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assassinations_by_firearm

    Wikipedia’s firearms assassination list shows a preponderance of handguns being utilized. I will assume the skills to properly make use of a rifle are not common throughout history.

    “Rifleman” skills are something semi-auto rifle owners should seek to aquire. (RWVA.org)

    French President Charles de Gaulle’s attempted assassin, Jean-Marie Bastien-Thiry, designed the Nord SS.10/SS.11 wire guided anti-tank missile. He did NOT attempt to use those technical engineering skills for a “boom,” preferring to use over 100+ rounds directed at the President and security.

    de Gaulle had him executed because he thought him a coward for acting only as a look out.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Bastien-Thiry

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @peterAUS
  109. @deschutes

    Derb seems to trust his Asian wife just fine, as I trust mine. He seems generally correct in his observations and inferences.

  110. Truth says:
    @RudyM

    Hey, Tienanmen Square!!!

    (Don’t let the phony protests fool you. This one was over Africans sleeping with Chinese girls too!)

  111. @deschutes

    Yes, yes, gun ownership causes gun crime.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/switzerland-high-rates-gun-ownership-why-doesnt-no-mass-shootings-a8230606.html

    I lived in quite a few countries and therefore am cogent enough to realize that ownership rates, by itself, is almost completely unrelated with gun crime. And despite what is believed, while the “Wild West” was almost archetypically filled with “redneck with guns,” actual gun crime was really rather low.

    A more realistic approach, if there is one, is that half-measures are failing. Either almost total gun suppression(and of course, the consequences of disarming the population), or have widespread training and ownership. The weird current mess is an excellent example of failing half-measures.

    As for the John Wayne ramble, you have no idea about my life or where I have been.

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
  112. Gleimhart says:
    @Thorfinnsson

    It doesn’t matter what percentage of the population blacks comprise if you’re stuck in traffic while being surrounded by rioting blacks ready to rip you out of your car and stomp you to death.

    As for there supposedly being a case for regulation, what case for what regulation?

  113. grapesoda says:
    @deschutes

    Why are black people so violent and commit so much more crime per capita than any other race? Writing on a website is sad and fucked up but being a criminal and killing innocent people is OK? You sure do have a weird version of morality.

  114. grapesoda says:
    @anonymous

    >> You could make the same point about the need for self-protection in societal collapse without ever mentioning race.

    Maybe he felt like writing about it. If the Huffington Post, NYT, Bezos Post, etc etc would stop writing about race then we wouldn’t need to. But we all know that’s not gonna happen.

    Do you also go and comment on leftist anti-white articles and lecture them not to talk about race?

  115. peterAUS says:
    @Joe Stalin

    I will assume the skills to properly make use of a rifle are not common throughout history.

    That’s an interesting point.

    Now, we could easily get over the Red Line here, so, I’ll try to comment but will, maybe, appear incoherent (or more incoherent than my usual posts).

    That…topic……is interesting and for obvious reasons we can’t really get into it.
    Not only here but anywhere. Speaking about that, even with friends, hypothetically, could be…tricky.

    I, personally, believe that a long range sniping is the best approach.
    And there is a catch as you mentioned above. To get proficient there, well, takes a lot of proper work and even some talent. Rifle marksmanship is just a foundation of that.
    On a basic practical level any …cancel that. There is a book

    https://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Over-Babylon-David-Mason/dp/B00RWMTT56

    and…hahahaha…oh man , no reviews. No…fucking…reviews. Hahaha…………
    Hilarious. Really made my day. Fucking hilarious.

    Anyway…..back. Almost fell of the chair.

    So, bottom line, any scoped bolt action rifle from the end of 19th century to today would work. Any “major war” bolt action would do.That’s why all this “gun bans” really don’t make much of a sense as far as that topic is concerned.Next, a proper ammo, but hand loading can be learnt fast. That’s for the “tools”.
    The skill is the thing as you say. Proper…………rifle……marksmanship. Just to around 800 meters, depending on where a round goes subsonic. All major OLD rifle calibers are at around that range. Hell, if one can hit the “E” target at 600 meters with a cold/first shot, that’s all the skill required.
    Any developed world trained sniper can do that. A lot of hunters too, let alone competition rifle shooters. In USA we are probably talking about, don’t know, more than 500 000? Makes you think, a?

    Anyway…..

  116. peterAUS says:
    @Joe Stalin

    French President Charles de Gaulle’s attempted assassin, Jean-Marie Bastien-Thiry, designed the Nord SS.10/SS.11 wire guided anti-tank missile. He did NOT attempt to use those technical engineering skills for a “boom,” preferring to use over 100+ rounds directed at the President and security.

    de Gaulle had him executed because he thought him a coward for acting only as a look out.

    Well, not quite sure about the later. Jean-Marie Bastien-Thiry was a complex character and all that was much more complicated.

    The assassins failed in the most basic approach to the job. That’s interesting because they were all experienced combat soldiers.
    Now, we can’t really dissect their mistakes etc (RED LINE) but they really made a mess of that attempt.
    From planning to execution they didn’t even stick to the most basics of the pure trade they came from. They didn’t follow the methodology that simple platoon commander does when executing ….even a simple patrol.
    That mixture of personalities involved and some the most basic mistakes they made always felt ….bizarre to me.

  117. @Daniel Chieh

    Under the occupation of Iraq by the USA and UK, the citizens were allowed to have FULL-AUTOMATIC AK-47s!

    “In a significant retreat in American efforts to seize weapons held by Iraqi citizens, American and British officials said today that Iraqis would be allowed to keep AK-47 assault rifles in their homes and businesses.

    “While American officials gave no public explanation for amending what had been a much tougher plan to rid postwar Iraq of heavy weapons, military officials have said they recognize the difficulties in disarming citizens at a time when Iraqis feel their security is still at risk.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/01/world/after-the-war-baghdad-iraqi-civilians-allowed-to-keep-assault-rifles.html

  118. I was thinking about the ongoing “Children’s Crusade Against the Second Amendment” being coordinated by the various rich leftists.

    What did Mao Zedong say:

    “Experience in the class struggle in the era of imperialism teaches us that it is only by the power of the gun that the working class and the labouring masses can defeat the armed bourgeoisie and landlords; in this sense we may say that only with guns can the whole world be transformed.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_power_grows_out_of_the_barrel_of_a_gun

    So the Kids-on-the-podium are advocating that they can can remove the “power of the gun that the working class and the labouring masses” possess through “Manufactured Consent” being driven by TPTB.

    That might make for interesting counter-protest signs. Leftist historical slogans versus Billionaire Armchair Communists.

  119. Gleimhart says:
    @deschutes

    I always marvel at the profound ignorance of the hoplophobe crowd. The salient facts which must be considered if discussing this subject honestly are routinely ignored. Instead, the hoplophobe resorts to parroting the same asinine assertions he’s heard elsewhere, lies, over and over. There are entire books written on the subject that annihilate these hoplophobic scolds, but such people are not interested in an honest and whole assessment of the issue.

    You can always tell right off when you’re dealing with an anti-gun sissy when he uses the idiotic formulation of “gun violence.”

    You can always tell right off when you’re dealing with an anti-gun sissy when he utterly fails to look at the racial breakdown of crimes where a gun was used, and, importantly, where existing gun laws were broken, including the use of black market firearms by convicted felons.

    You can always tell right off when you’re dealing with an anti-gun sissy when he can’t be bothered with addressing the fact that some of the largest mass shootings were committed in Europe, when anti-gun laws are the hoplophobes wet dream.

    You can always tell right off when you’re dealing with an anti-gun sissy when he fails to understand that the U.S. is a much larger population than any European nation, and per capita breakdown are kind of important.

    You can always tell right off when you’re dealing with an anti-gun sissy when he starts in with the “John Wayne” mischaracterization of gun owners.

    You can always tell right off when you’re dealing with an anti-gun sissy when he is obnoxiously ignorant of the fact that every single day in the U.S., many people who would otherwise be vulnerable are instead able to defend life of self and of family, and, moreover, most of those instances don’t involve even shooting the gun.

    You can always tell right off when you’re dealing with an anti-gun sissy when he he plays the concern troll, i.e., “I feel sorry for you and your country.” Anyone with that view doesn’t even know my country. I’ve been all over the world and Americans enjoy a quality of life higher than anywhere else.

    You can always tell right off when you’re dealing with an anti-gun sissy when he can’t wrap his head around the fact that gun laws will not prevent mass murders, but they will yield explosive growth for black market firearms.

    You can always tell right off when you’re dealing with an anti-gun sissy when he obsesses over “assault rifles” and, more particularly, AR-15′s.

    You can always tell right off when you’re dealing with an anti-gun sissy when he refuses to acknowledge that Americans are safer and more secure than most other people. Violent crime that happens in the States is largely confined to ugly areas where “vibrant diversity” is the order of the day.

    You can always tell right off when you’re dealing with an anti-gun sissy when he is too much of a certifiable dummy to know that he is a sitting duck, no matter where in the world he may be.

    The list goes on and on and on…

    That said, I enjoy the fact that I can own and use firearms without the permission of Leftwing lowlifes or of anybody else.

  120. Truth says:
    @deschutes

    Hey, Chong Wang Xunio!

    That’s a great second nickanme Dan-O.

  121. Corvinus says:
    @anarchyst

    “It turns out that those whites of the 1950′s (myself included) that protested against forced integration were right, all along.”

    No, you are absolutely wrong. All the Southrons had to do was maintain “separate but equal”. But you guys even screwed that up royally by having inadequate funding for white-black schools and a knack for denying basic political rights. You got it good and hard.

    “Blacks were doing much better when they had their own institutions, businesses, social organizations, residential areas, etc.”

    Those were institutions meant to be inferior to white owned companies and white dominated neighborhoods.

    “It was communists and other society destroyers (the chosen and other northern-based carpetbaggers) who are directly responsible for our present racial and social ills.”

    No, it was Southrons.

    “Despite the lies and fabrications by the so-called mainstream media the civil-rights marches in the South were not peaceful gatherings that were met with dogs and fire hoses, but were violent black confrontations that actually set back the cause\ of TRUE civil-rights . .”

    There are dozens of videos, as well as thousands of eye witness accounts, where there were peaceful marches. Some of them turned violent when the police chose to use force when confronting the protestors.

    “Mrs. Liuzzo was a Detroit housewife who traveled to the deep south (without her husband) to run around with black freedom riders at night. This was a recipe that was asking for trouble. What business did she have running around with blacks at night in the South while she had a family in Detroit?? Why did she put herself in harms way ??”

    Because they have the liberty to travel where they want and assist their fellow Americans in times of need.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  122. The 2nd Amendment guarantees the rights of any American citizen – including blacks and people of Mexican descent – to own guns. This is why whites in urban environments tend to be a lot less enthusiastic about America being flooded with guns. The Swiss have it right – train citizens to be responsible gun owners, but make sure that immigrants’ access to guns is severely limited. And limit access to handguns, which are essentially weapons for criminals.

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
  123. @TheBoom

    I am certainly in favor of self defense, but you do realize that the farmer/boer was killing blacks in Rhodesia, Africa at will and with little to consequence.

  124. @KenH

    You are wrong, blacks who are weapons enthusiasts and gun owners belong to the NRA and even oif they don’t they still defend the right to own weapons. So no, not only whites defend private gun ownership.

    I am not sure what state you live in. But I would be hard pressed to believe that every black politician is bent on taking your weapon. It has not been fully explained why people in urban communities, certain urban communities experience more violent or certain types of crime. But apparently being black is no more a shield from that dynamic than the population before them who owned similar conditions.

    Sadly, republicans chose color polity over conservative polity and despite the fact that republicans tend to processes that work, since the end of reconstruction, the Republicans abandoned ensuring the equal access and participation of blacks and eventually lost most black support after Pres Nixon. You can’t tell people that mass discrimination against them is all in their head when reality records something different. While, blacks are largely supportive of democratic polity — gun ownership is not a top priority. Blacks support a lot of polity that are not all that important to them, because the democrats at least pretend reality and history matter.

  125. anarchyst says:
    @Corvinus

    Corvinus, you are dead wrong. I stand by my statements. When you have federal troops (illegal to use against American civilians under posse comitatus) forcing a dictatorial government “decision” upon honest white people, that is the end of “freedom of association”, but only for whites.
    You are merely spewing the pap that was (force) fed to you through the so-called “history books”. I was there and personally witnessed the criminal activities by the marchers.
    Blacks had their own businesses, most of them doing quite well. They were pushed out of business when the civil-rights laws were enacted.
    As to your assertion that “separate but equal” was badly handled, you are wrong, once again. Look at the trillions of dollars spent on “civil rights” programs in the last 50 years with dismal results. Urban public schools (primarily black) receive MORE funding than suburban white public schools and still have dismal results.
    Mrs. Liuzzo should have stayed home instead of running around with blacks in the south. She had no business being there.
    Everything you have spouted can be proven wrong. Look around you. the “fruits” of the civil-rights movement are rotting on the vine.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
    , @Anonymous
  126. anarchyst says:
    @Joe Stalin

    Here are true (corrected) stories about “icons” of the so-called “civil rights” movement . . .

    There is much more to the “Emmett Till” story that is not widely known. Of course, killing him was wrong, (and made him into a “martyr” of the black “civil-rights” movement). but–it is not generally known that Emmett Till was a strapping young man of about 160 lbs.–NOT a “little boy” as some media types tried to portray him as. He was a known womanizer and attempted to take his cocky “Chicago ways” in dealing with women to the Deep South. He was sent to live with relatives in the South because his Chicago relatives could not handle him. He had a “cocky attitude” and bragged about “getting it on” with white women–not a good idea in the South. . . According to published accounts, Mr. Till did not just “whistle” at a white woman, but grabbed, manhandled and fondled a married white woman. In Southern culture, this was, and still is, the ultimate form of disrespect. Despite Mr. Till’s relatives’ attempts to spirit him “out of town” to avoid retribution by the woman’s relatives and townspeople, his cocky attitude “got in the way”, similar to the way that “young master Trayvon’s” attitude got him killed. Despite being given numerous “chances” to apologize for his behavior, he was defiant to the end. IF he had apologized for his behavior, he would still be alive today. In fact, one of his killers was a black man.
    It is interesting to note that Emmett Till’s father was executed by the U S military for multiple rapes. Maybe “the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree” . . .

    Rosa Parks was not the “ordinary” black woman that so-called historians made her to be. She was an organizer for the NAACP and was “planted” in order to advance the cause of black “civil-rights” to which she was successful.
    Approximately a year previous to Rosa Parks’ “bus ride” and refusal to vacate her seat, a REAL ordinary black woman did the same thing. This black woman received NO publicity or support from the NAACP or other black “civil-rights” organizations. You see, she was an unmarried black woman with children. According to the black civil-rights crowd, this would not do. They wanted someone who was “squeaky clean” without any “baggage”. In fact, the “white guy” sitting behind her was part of the “set-up”. He was a UPI reporter, contracted to “stage” the event…not only that, in the photo there is no one else on the bus. Ms. Parks could have sat wherever she wanted.
    Hence, Rosa Parks made (fabricated) history . . .

    Martin Luther (Michael) King was well-known for frequenting prostitutes, beating and abusing them while exclaiming that he “finally felt like a white man”. His own associates have stated as such. He also plagiarized his college papers and doctoral thesis. Of course, this was overlooked because of his status. King was also a communist.

    Jesse Jackson used to brag to his associates on how he would spit in the food of white patrons of the restaurant he worked at.

    There are many more fabrications of history that were used to lend “legitimacy” to the so-called “civil-rights” movement . . .

    More to come . . .

  127. Ragno says:
    @deschutes

    Not true. Early on, in the first few months, sure…it’s entirely possible we’d see minor Wild West flurries of gunplay. But that will subside very quickly as the reality of prey firing back at predators becomes a well-established fact of life.

    Check the violent-crime numbers for any municipality with the least restrictions on legal gun ownership before you begin your (invariably foul-mouthed) sermon….they don’t lie. Civility always has a pricetag, but it’s never rises to the extortion-levels of Letting the Gummint Do It For You.

    And before you start citing falling-crime stats in our major cities, remember to factor in the new paranoid-lockdown superstate reality in most blue states today, with high-tech camera and audio surveillance of everyone at all times. Not only is it antithetical to human liberty as envisioned by the Founders, it provides sotto-voce, but invaluable, insurance against anyone so much as mussing the Deep State’s hair, let alone turning them out and really-and-truly Draining the Swamp.

  128. Corvinus says:
    @anarchyst

    “Corvinus, you are dead wrong. I stand by my statements.”

    You can stand by your statements all you want, the fact remains you are sadly mistaken. Confirmation bias is getting the best of you, I’m afraid.

    “When you have federal troops (illegal to use against American civilians under posse comitatus) forcing a dictatorial government “decision” upon honest white people, that is the end of “freedom of association”, but only for whites.”

    You really need to be properly informed here.

    https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/lbj-sends-federal-troops-to-alabama

    “You are merely spewing the pap that was (force) fed to you through the so-called “history books”. I was there and personally witnessed the criminal activities by the marchers.”

    Corrected for accuracy –> I was there and personally witnessed the legal activities by the marchers and the subsequent actions taken by Southron police officers, which led to violence and arrests.

    “Blacks had their own businesses, most of them doing quite well. They were pushed out of business when the civil-rights laws were enacted.”

    You have it wrong, I’m afraid.

    https://folklife.nsula.edu/civilwartocivilrights/Black-owned%20Businesses.html

    “As to your assertion that “separate but equal” was badly handled, you are wrong, once again. Look at the trillions of dollars spent on “civil rights” programs in the last 50 years with dismal results.”

    That is a red herring on your part.

    “Mrs. Liuzzo should have stayed home instead of running around with blacks in the south. She had no business being there.”

    Of course she had “business” there. It is well within her liberty to help people. Perhaps you are not a Christian and thus unable to comprehend the work of the Lord and a person’s calling to it.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  129. anarchyst says:
    @Corvinus

    I don’t know what kind of “stuff” you are smoking, but you are dead wrong on all points.
    Refute my statements…problem is, you can’t…
    Regards,

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  130. Anonymous[164] • Disclaimer says:
    @anarchyst

    “Mrs. Liuzzo should have stayed home instead of running around with blacks in the south. She had no business being there.”

    What about her freedom to associate with causes she wants? Its ridiculous to say that people should not be allowed to express their heartfelt beliefs and going over her history, its obvious that she was a true believer. She was hardly the first or only white person to have felt that way – even one of the Founders(Benjamin Franklin) spent much of the last part of his life advocating with the Quakers for black rights. Did they also deserve to be murdered?

    I’ve read contemporary work then and even before – Northern writers consistently and sometimes even vehemantly argued for blacks, and Southern writers did no credit for themselves by indulging in various fictions(one of them, seemingly ridiculous now, was that blacks were naturally unaccustomed to thrive near whites, and would be sickly and have fewer children).

    The South consistently demonstrated lower intellect overall and resorted to violence(very much also inherited from Scottish descent), and its not surprising then that they lost out to “goodwhites” once information was widespread.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  131. expat47 says:

    Hey, John. In basic training I used a mark 4 enfield. In Burma I lugged around a beautiful snub nosed Enfield 2 with the long bayonet, not the snarky pig sticker that came with the model 4. I collected over 50 guns, all military, from the Revolutionary War, Yes I had a Brown Bess!! to WW11, Japanese, German, Italian and lastly an AK47. I lived in Virginia at the time but moved back to N.Y. into a retired home of independent living and was obliged to sell them all. Were you in WW11 or in a the southern Pacific as was a relative of of mine, he was a Bofors gunner, claimed it could knock a tank over. I am interested in your military history. Don’t meet a lot of Brits here in the USA, so it’s glad I hopped on your website, my favourite place to visit. Love your articles. Respectfully, Chotabo for “little bo peep in” Urdu.

  132. anarchyst says:
    @Anonymous

    Your northern elitism is showing…it turns out that the south was right. However, since “the victors write the history”, the true nature of history has been obscured. Your slandering of southern whites is not only condescending, but shameful on its face. You should know better.
    All one has to do is compare the southern statesmen, General Robert E. Lee with the northern drunkard shyster criminal Ulysses S. Grant.
    It is apparent that you never had dealings with southerners
    I would trust a southerner who speaks honest “truth to power” over some sly, double talking northerner who “speaks through his teeth”, (not unlike the methods of the “chosen”)…
    Here is a little history lesson for you…
    It might interest you to know, that even your “savior” Abraham Lincoln had no use for blacks and (correctly) wanted to see them repatriated. In fact, the “Emancipation Proclamation” did not apply to all of the United states, only to the “states in rebellion”…

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  133. sayless says:
    @Yan Shen

    I believe Mr Derbyshire lives on Long Island and many of the towns there are a lot more dangerous than they were a generation or two ago. There have been some horrible home invasions/store invasions, swarm attacks, crimes like that.

  134. Anonymous[204] • Disclaimer says:
    @anarchyst

    “Your northern elitism is showing…it turns out that the south was right.”

    Which is why the purchasing power gdp per capita of red states in some cases are lower than even that of Italy, Spain or even parts of Middle East. Average wealth in most first world countries – in Europe, North America,, Asia – is THREE times that of Mississippi. Great intellectual ability right there.

    And much like your hero, also obsessed with staying poor with rural ethics and thus failing before modern concerns.

  135. @Peter Akuleyev

    “And limit access to handguns, which are essentially weapons for criminals.”

    Right, like in the UK.

    —-

    The Gold Standard of Gun Control
    Book Review of Joyce Malcolm, Guns and Violence: The English Experience

    By David B. Kopel[1], Paul Gallant[2], and Joanne D. Eisen[3]

    2 Journal of Law, Economics & Policy 417(2006).

    [MORE]

    PDF version of this article. More by Kopel on British gun control.

    For the last several decades, the United States and Canada have enjoyed robust scholarly inquiry into the law and policy issues regarding gun control and gun rights. Yet in the United Kingdom, scholarly attention to firearms policy has been almost nil.[4] As a result, the definitive history of the right to arms guarantee in the 1689 English Bill of Rights was written by the American Joyce Lee Malcolm. Her book To Keep and Bear Arms: The Origins of an Anglo-American Right focused on the century of political developments leading up to the 1689 Bill of Rights, and on the effect of the 1689 arms rights guarantee during the eighteenth century in Great Britain and the United States.[5] In Guns and Violence: The English Experience[6]Malcolm broadens her scope to tell the story of the arms possession, arms control, and violent crime in England from the Middle Ages through the end of the twentieth century.

    Malcolm describes the patterns of gun possession and violence, as well as changes in British culture due to war, food shortages, politics, and crime policy. She pays particular attention to changes in the culture of self-defense, both from the viewpoint of the Crown and of the subjects, and to how crime victims are treated by the government. Formerly, Britons happily contrasted their own permissive gun laws with the repressive laws on the Continent, and considered liberal British laws to exemplify the superior and free character of the British nation. But today, British gun controls are the most severe in the western world.[7]

    Malcolm’s story is significant for readers interested in comparative criminology or British history. But the story of what happened in Great Britain over the last century is also of worldwide importance, because the modern British government has been aggressively working to export its policies on firearms and self-defense. At the United Nations, the British delegation has been in the forefront of efforts to create a legally binding system of international gun control. The Foreign Office has been extremely active in many other world fora, in regional conferences, and in bilateral relationships, in promoting the broadest gun prohibition policies possible, wherever possible. The British government is also a major funder of international gun prohibition lobbies and organizations. Quite plainly, the British government believes that it has gotten gun control policy just right, and that the British model must be imposed worldwide.

    Accordingly, Guns and Violence: The English Experience is relevant for every person trying to decide whether to welcome or to resist the imposition of British-model gun controls in his or her own country. In this Article, we present Malcolm’s story of British arms policy in the second millennium, and we also extend that story a few more years forward, until the present.

    Malcolm’s story begins in firearms-free medieval England of the thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, when the homicide rate was approximately 18-23 annually per 100,000 population.[8] Thereafter, the homicide rate began a six century decline. Even after firearms became generally available in the sixteenth century, homicides rates continued to fall. The right to arms was officially recognized in the 1689 Bill of Rights, and for the next two centuries, England had almost no gun control, except for anti-poaching laws, and a two-year period in 1819-1821 when stricter rules were imposed on a few counties due to concerns about working class unrest. Violent crimes continued to decline until the twentieth century.[9]

    Various minor and ineffectual gun controls were enacted in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries; proposals for more extensive controls ran into strenuous opposition in Parliament from MPs who still believed in natural rights. The advocacy for gun control was almost always accompanied by a bodyguard of lies, such as when the government, fearful of a workers rebellion, pushed through the Firearms Act of 1920. The government falsely told the public that gun crimes were rapidly increasing, and hid the law’s true motive (political control) from the public, presenting the law as a mere anti-crime measure.[10]

    In practice, the law eliminated the right of British subjects to be armed, and turned it into a privilege. The Firearms Act also began a decades-long process of eliminating the public’s duty to protect their society and right to protect themselves.

    The Firearms Act set the scene for civilian acceptance of further restrictions–not only on gun possession–but on almost any act of self-defense. [11] Malcolm describes a series of confidential memos, the first of which was written in 1937, from the Home Office to local police in charge of the issuance of licenses. [12] The memos were designed to reduce the number of lawfully possessed rifles and handguns as, coincidentally, crime rates began to increase. By 1969, the police were advised to deny all rifle and handgun licenses for self-defense purposes.[13]

    Shotguns, which had historically been regulated less severely than rifles and handguns, were brought into the licensing web in the 1960s; then in the 1980s, the licensing system was changed to make sure that no one would possess a shotgun defensively. “Safe storage” requirements were invented by the police, and enforced with increasing severity so as ensure that a lawfully-stored gun of any type could never be available for defense in a sudden emergency. Parliament had never voted to outlaw defensive gun ownership; instead, the Home Office, operating through secret memos, had instructed the police how to use their control over the gun licensing process to eliminate the right of every Briton to arm against criminals.

    In 1998, after a known pedophile used a handgun to murder kindergarten children in Dunblane, Scotland, the Parliament banned non-government possession of handguns. As a result the Gun Control Network (a prohibition advocacy group) enthused that “present British controls over firearms are regarded as �the gold standard’ in many countries.” According to GCN spokesperson Mrs. Gill Marshall-Andrews, “the fact that we have a gold standard is something to be proud of�.”[14]

    A July 2001 study from King’s College London’s Centre for Defence Studies found that handgun-related crime increased by nearly 40% in the two years following implementation of the handgun ban.[15] The study also found that there had been “no direct link” between lawful possession of guns by licensed citizens and misuse of guns by criminals.[16] According to the King’s College report, although the 1998 handgun ban resulted in over 160,000 licensed handguns being withdrawn from personal possession, “the UK appears not to have succeeded in creating the gun free society for which many have wished. Gun related violence continues to rise and the streets of Britain�seem no more safe.”[17]

    A few weeks before the King’s College study was released, Home Office figures showed that violent crime in Great Britain was rising at the second fastest rate in the world, well above the U.S. rate, and on par with crime-ridden South Africa.[18] In February 2001, it was reported that 26 percent of persons living in England and Wales had been victims of crime in 1999.[19] Home Secretary Jack Straw admitted, “levels of victimisation are higher than in most comparable countries for most categories of crime.” On May 4, 2001, the Telegraph disclosed that the risk of a citizen being assaulted was “higher in Britain than almost anywhere else in the industrialized world, including America.”[20] The latest U.N. data show that Scotland (which has always kept separate criminal justice statistics from England and Wales) has the highest violent crime rate of any developed nation, and that England and Wales are not much better.[21]

    With passage of the Firearms Act of 1997, “it was confidently assumed that the new legislation effectively banning handguns would have the direct effect of reducing certain types of violent crime by reducing access to weapons.”[22] The news media promised that the “world’s toughest laws will help to keep weapons off the streets.”[23]

    Yet faster than British gun-owners could surrender their handguns for destruction, guns began flooding into Great Britain from the international black market (especially from eastern Europe and from China), driven by the demands of the country’s rapidly developing criminal gun-culture.[24]

    Malcolm does not hide her disdain for the creators of the last century of destructive policies in Great Britain, nor for the nineteenth century bureaucrats who began laying the foundation for the twentieth century failures. In less than a hundred years, British policymakers have undone six prior centuries of progress, and turned twenty-first century England, like thirteenth century England, into the most violent, crime-ridden nation in Western Europe.

    While not claiming to supply a complete explanation for the catastrophic surge in British crime, Malcolm argues that the gun control laws, particularly the anti-self defense components of those laws, deserve part of the blame. Her conclusion is shared by Peter Hitchens, who also argues that extremely repressive gun laws are one of the major causes of Britain’s modern crime wave.[25]

    Malcolm suggests that many criminals are capable of at least elementary logical thought, and thus can be deterred by the risk of confronting a victim who can fight back effectively; conversely, criminals can be emboldened by the prospect of attacking a defenseless victim.[26] For example, a major U.S. study of convicted felons in ten U.S. state prison systems found that 60% of prisoners said that they would not attack a victim known to possess a firearm, and 74% of their sample agreed that they would avoid occupied houses on the chance that the owner(s) might possess a firearm.[27]

    However, British criminals have little expectation of confronting a victim who possesses a firearm. Even the small percentage of British homes which have a lawfully-owned gun would not be able to unlock the gun from one safe, and then unlock the ammunition from another safe, in time to use the gun against a home invader.[28] It should hardly be surprising, then, that Britain has a much higher rate of home invasion burglaries than does the United States. [29]

    Technically, self-defense is still legal in Great Britain, but in practice, any act of self-defense is subject to a prosecutor’s second-guessing of what is “reasonable.” For example, Brett Osborn is now serving a 5-year sentence for manslaughter. In order to protect a friend, “He stabbed a blood-covered, drug-crazed intruder�.” His prosecution stemmed from the fact that he failed to warn the criminal that he had access to a knife.[30]

    In 2004, despite popular demand, the British government refused to reform the laws regarding victim self-defense. Home Office Minister Fiona Mactaggart claimed that self-defense reform would be a “licence to kill with impunity.”[31]

    Coming to the aid of crime victims is strongly discouraged. British subjects are taught that, if they are attacked by a criminal, they should not yell “Help! Help!” because such cries might encourager a bystander to use physical force against the criminal. Rather, victims are supposed to yell, “Call the police.” Likewise, the government tells Britons that when they are attacked, they should not fight back, but should instead curl into a ball or take a similar defensive posture.[32]

    If a properly-behaved British bystander does “call the police,” the response may be lethally slow. Vicky Horgan and her sister Emma Walton were shot by Stuart Horgan on June 6, 2004.[33] A total of sixty calls to 999 (the US’s equivalent to 9-1-1) were made, but help did not arrive for over an hour. The Express explained that a major cause of the delay was police reluctance to confront an armed criminal.[34]

    Nor are criminals afraid of being jailed, as the authorities cannot afford to incarcerate them. In 2006, burglary was essentially decriminalized, by a new government policy to merely give a “caution” (an official warning) to first time burglars who have been apprehended; now, a burglary will literally not even result in an arrest for a burglar who is caught for the first time.[35]
    Britain’s New Gun Culture

    While tightening the screws on law-abiding gun owners, the British authorities were declaring their determination to prevent the existence of an American-style “gun culture.” In that regard, the British government has been very successful.

    In previous generations, Britain had a long-standing tradition of sporting gun use, and an unwritten agreement that both the police and the criminals would eschew the use of guns. Everything has now changed. The new criminal gun culture in Britain is one in which, according to the British government, there is “the perception of firearms as a means of resolving differences through violence.”[36]

    British gun laws have transformed the way children are introduced to firearms. In the past, the many parents who participated in the shooting sports taught their children safe and responsible firearm handling practices. Now, the gun control laws are deliberately operated to impose bureaucratic barriers that encourage law-abiding shooters to give up their sport; many have done so.

    Never introduced into a law-abiding, responsible gun culture of adults, Britain’s modern youth are creating their own “gun culture”, a sort of non-fiction version of Lord of the Flies. Children in gangs, some as young as nine, roam the streets uncontrolled, victimizing the aged and the infirm.[37] Today, one third of all British criminals under the age of 25 admit to owning or having access to a firearm.[38]

    In contrast, firearm ownership in the United States continues, for the most part, to be kept in the family, handed down from parent to child. What happens when parents teach children about shooting? The most detailed empirical data come from the Rochester (N.Y.) Study on Urban Delinquency and Substance Abuse.[39]

    Funded by the U.S. Department of Justice, the study tracked 7th‑ and 8th‑graders for 4‑1/2 years until 11th or 12th grade, providing “quite a thorough picture of adolescent development during the junior and senior high school years.” The researchers explain that “To maximize the number of serious, chronic offenders available for the study, the sample includes more youth from high-crime areas and fewer from low-crime areas.” For the same reason, the study focused exclusively on males.

    One of the topics of the Rochester Study was adolescent behavior with firearms. Of the group of boys who owned guns legally by the time they were in 9th or 10th grade, not one of them committed any crime or delinquent act with a gun.

    Of the boys who did not, by 9th or 10th grade, already own a legal gun, one percent would commit a firearms crime in the next few years. As for the boys who already illegally owned guns, twenty-four percent would eventually use a gun in a crime.

    As for the overall rate of street crimes (remember, the study deliberately oversampled at-risk males), of the boys who lawfully owned guns, fourteen percent eventually committed at least one street crime. Of the non-gun owners, twenty-four percent committed a street crime. Of the illegal gun owners, seventy-four percent committed a street crime.

    Thus, it appears that there is something about the culture of law-abiding gun ownership which is associated with lower rates of gun crime, and of general crime. The researchers observed: “Parents who own legal guns socialize their children into the legitimate gun culture. Those parents who do not own guns are unlikely to socialize their children in that manner.” Simply put, the Rochester youths who were given lethal weapons by their parents, and who were instructed in how to use those weapons by their parents (usually, by the father), behaved more responsibly than did their peers.

    Today, Great Britain is generally a more dangerous place than the United States.[40] Great Britain is also a place which has successfully crushed the spread of a large American-style gun-culture. While America’s gun culture is still composed, overwhelmingly, of law-abiding, hard-working, family-oriented people, Great Britain’s new gun culture consists of armed criminals, and armed police.[41] One fact is undeniable: the Firearms Act “did not stop the use of guns, it prevented their use by honest citizens � and created a monopoly, with the ownership and use of guns confined to two classes: professional criminals and the police.”[42]

    Guns and Violence tells a remarkable story of a society’s self-destruction, of how a government in a few decades managed to reverse six hundred years of social progress in violence reduction. The book is also a testament to the amazing self-confidence of British governments; Labour and Conservative alike have proceeded with an extreme anti-self-defense agenda, although the agenda has never had much supporting evidence beyond the government’s own platitudes. Whether the rest of the world should follow that bipartisan British agenda is an essential question in the current United Nations debate over international gun control.

    http://www.davekopel.com/2A/Foreign/The-Gold-Standard-of-Gun-Control.htm

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  136. Corvinus says:
    @anarchyst

    “Refute my statements…problem is, you can’t…”

    Actually, I did. The issue is that you are stuck in 1955. And, please be reminded, there is a difference between a Southron and a Southerner.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  137. peterAUS says:
    @Joe Stalin

    Great Britain’s new gun culture consists of armed criminals, and armed police.[41] One fact is undeniable: the Firearms Act “did not stop the use of guns, it prevented their use by honest citizens � and created a monopoly, with the ownership and use of guns confined to two classes: professional criminals and the police.”

    Of course.

    It goes deeper: to make an average citizen MEEK, hence submit to authority.
    That is the only goal of smart people pushing for “gun control”: to rule over meek general populace.

    It is interesting that in all this blah blah about “gun control” it never goes both ways….only one way, against an average citizen.

    You don’t see protests saying: we want gun control for citizens AND the State apparatus.They want disarmed, hence weak, their fellow citizen, but, at the SAME time they do want more and more militarized police, surveillance state etc.

    UK is a very good example. That myth of unarmed police persists, but, reality is a bit different.
    And, armed police is there to protect IMPORTANT people and institutions and to react to violent crime. Interesting, a?

    I really believe this issue can’t be resolved by debate. It’s not a rational issue, but purely emotional.
    You can’t beat emotion with reason.
    You have to be emotional too……….or….something else.

    A couple of days ago I got into conversation about a certain topic with an intelligent, educated and mature woman. All was going fine until a certain ….spot…when I just saw the switch into highly emotional. Felt as that…..spot…simply blocked all her rational faculties.
    Yeah….killing…..that was the spot.
    All about history, science, geopolitics, daily politics, human nature…anything….simply dissolved, I believe, because she had an image of a man being shot down by a machinegun.
    That image flipped her; the body language, voice, face, eyes…everything…simply changed in instant. A different person was there, in fact.

    That element is, IMHO, missing from all this.
    Now, the puppet masters know that so well, of course. But people into the 2nd appear to miss it by a mile.

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
  138. @peterAUS

    Here’s the thing: we don’t have “The Megaphone.” Yeah, that means we can’t bombard women with anything approaching what the enemies of the 2nd Amendment have been doing for decades. For example, on virtually all over-the-air broadcast scripted television, ALL ostensibly “legally” owned firearms are “registered,” “permit to own,” “permit to carry,” “licensed” or the owner is “registered.”

    This anti-gun propaganda has sunk so far into the sub-conscience that they don’t even realize that that they have been programmed. Don’t believe me? At 1:13 in this video will show my point:

    What gun owners can do is be that sliver of votes that can push a candidate over in an election. The gun lobby won’t get involved in elections that are “sure things,” they try to be the force that tilts the balance all things considered.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  139. peterAUS says:
    @Joe Stalin

    Oh, I do get you.

    Unfortunately, I do believe it goes way above/beyond the organized propaganda.

    Here is the thing:
    Say, a social event, around 10 of us. All well read, mature, educated and intelligent people (save me, perhaps….). Mixed class (mostly middle class professionals but a couple of working class people too). Two of us,say, “veterans” (or so I say), the rest “civilians”.
    All civilians are into “gun-control”. All…of….them.
    Only two of us aren’t.

    They don’t know, they don’t care they don’t know and they don’t want to know.
    It’s not rational. I’ve come to believe it’s something else. I’ll try to explain. Try.

    Males:
    They are comfortable with their lives. They don’t want any disruptions. They are winners in this game and they want to enjoy it. Be happy. Go shopping, travelling, having fine meals.
    The detriment to that enjoyment is, for them, a loser in the game with a gun. Either he/she goes on a rampage, or, he/she forces the Power to clamp down.
    The first one, the thought of that, messes their late sipping on a Sunday morning.
    The second one, the thought of that, messes their ideas of travel.
    Females:
    Similar to above, plus mother instinct. The above will affect their kids too. Fine boys/girls attending fine schools. The places where all this recent took place.

    I can say that I know something about the topic. They even accept that. Does….not……matter.
    Each time conversation stops because they simply shut down and change the subject. Each and every time.

    I’ve come to conclusion that such people could wake up only after a traumatic experience.
    For this topic, a mass social unrest with plenty of shooting of people like them.

    I do believe that those are lost cause. And, interestingly enough, they are the most vocal.

    I believe that the lower middle and working class are good recipient for the 2nd. And, probably, some parts of upper middle class.
    Both groups, for different reasons, would want to be armed in a case of any social unrest. The top to defend themselves against looters. The bottom to defend themselves against mobs.
    Something like that.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @Joe Stalin
  140. peterAUS says:
    @peterAUS

    To complete the thought, here is what I believe.
    Sooner or later people into the 2nd will have to make a stand. Literally “come and get them”.
    I’ll keep it simple:
    One guy, great for “Them”.
    10 guys together, even better.

    100 guys, working together, not great but manageable.

    1000 guys, working together, not good for “Them”. Not at all.
    10 000…..perfect. Won’t be any violence in fact. “They” will blink and start conceding.

    Hehe…now the hard part, for Americans.
    How to get 10 000 guys, working together, onto something like that?

    I’ll believe it’s possible when see certain signs in public discourse.
    At the moment, not even close to beginning, IMHO.

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
  141. @peterAUS

    I believe that giving your children firearms BEFORE they get married is the key to preserving gun rights. Too many leftist women have vetoed potential gun ownership in a family. Give a pistol or rifle to your children as gifts. That makes it THEIRS, and not to be tossed at the whims of their marital partner.

    I have given a Ruger 10/22 as a wedding gift. You can too.

    Christmas gifts. Birthday gifts. Graduation gifts.

    Make sure your children are ARMED when they leave home.

    Gun Culture is American Heritage; pass it on your offspring.

    Your grand kids will thank you.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  142. @peterAUS

    “устрашение” is Russian for “intimidation” and “deterrence.”

    After the Sandy Hook incident, AR-15 type rifle production (5,000 lower receivers max. rate/week) went it’s limit. That mean they were making ARs at the rate of quarter-million a year.

    And there were ammunition shortages occurring throughout the US.

    That means the unorganized militia was preparing itself.

    For what I will leave to your imagination.

    But I am sure the Obama Administration knew the implications of gun shop shelves being stripped of every militarily useful rifle, up to Moisan-Nagant M1891s.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  143. peterAUS says:
    @Joe Stalin

    I believe that giving your children firearms BEFORE they get married is the key to preserving gun rights.

    An interesting and, at the moment, practical point.
    I got my first (air) rifle when I was 8. Same with my kids.

    Here’s what I’ve been doing (not just blabbing on the Internet): wherever I’ve worked in “Civvy street” I’d, very carefully, assess and pick a guy, one at the time, start talking. He passes the “talk Selection” I bring him to the range. Just one day.
    I bring the “tools”, he pays the ammo. All day fun. Start slowly, finish, well…”practical”.
    Get a “convert”.

    Still, at least in corporate environment, that’s one in fifty. But a good one.

  144. anarchyst says:
    @Corvinus

    And 1955 was a much better time for all. You still have not provided a cogent refutation to my points. What are you afraid of?

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  145. anarchyst says:

    There are those who will not listen to reason, especially when it comes to preserving our God-given “rights”. There are ways to deal with people like this, especially when it comes to firearms and “gun control”.
    One important aspect of preserving our “rights” is to approach others logically and gently refute their misguided concepts about “rights”.
    Getting them to “think” for themselves, always “putting the ball in their court” is an effective way to get them away from illogical “groupthink”. Getting them to question their own (illogical) pre-conceived notions about firearms, making it “their own idea” in general is a good start.
    I have been quite successful in getting those who are “misguided” to change their views by asking them, “why would you want to give up your rights?”. I then explain that a firearm is merely a “tool” that can be used for good OR evil…nothing more, and that a firearm is incapable of firing on its own, requiring an “operator” to make it function.
    A case in point, that I am particularly proud of is getting a spouse of a friend to change her views on firearms ownership and use. Being a particularly religious person, she considered firearms to be “evil” and would not allow them in her house. Talking to her about biblical principles and the passage where Jesus Christ told his followers to “sell a garment and purchase the means to protect one’s life” was part of my argument. The other part was stressing “reverence for life”. As a Christian, she was opposed to abortion (a good thing). I stressed that, under Christian doctrine, life was most precious, and it was not only a “duty”, but an OBLIGATION to defend innocent life and that the current-day means of defending one’s life and the life of others was to be armed. In essence, “a good guy with a gun” can thwart evil.
    Two trips to the range, while introducing her to the intricacies and safe handling of firearms was all it took. She is a much better shot than her husband and conceal carries wherever she goes.
    Another aspect to “winning hearts and minds” is to introduce “non-believers” to firearms themselves by taking them to a range, and letting them try out firearms for themselves. The self-satisfaction and FUN that they experience has done much to show them that firearms owners are not ogres and maladjusted individuals, but truly have the best interests of society at heart. The range fees and ammunition costs that I incur are well worth seeing the outright enjoyment that they experience. I follow up their range experience with advice on suitable firearms and their rights, which are considered non-negotiable.
    I would urge all freedom-loving firearms advocates to do the same.

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
    , @peterAUS
  146. SMK says: • Website
    @anonymous

    The horrendous and sickening atrocities of the Carr Brothers and Knoxville savages and myriads of other subhuman beasts and monsters who’ve raped and gang-raped, tortured, maimed, brutalized, terrorized, and murdered whites over the last 50 years, clearly motivated to some degree by “racial vengeance,” predominantly in most instances, is “justified, given the cruelties and indignities of the past”?!

    Slavery was abolished over 150-years ago. Segregation was abolished over 50-years ago. Given the myriads of atrocities and tens of millions of crimes that blacks have committed against whites since the passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964, blacks should be forced to pay whites reparations. Black millionaires should pay reparations to the millions of whites who’ve been assaulted, raped, gang-raped, robbed, mugged, brutalized, and terrorized by black criminals. And to the families of all the whites who’ve been murdered by blacks. Race vengeance by whites against blacks is far more justified today than the opposite given the “cruelties and indignities” committed against whites by black over the last half century.

    • Agree: anarchyst
    • Replies: @Truth
    , @anarchyst
  147. Corvinus says:
    @anarchyst

    “And 1955 was a much better time for all”.

    No, not for black people.

    “You still have not provided a cogent refutation to my points”.

    You simply ignored them.

  148. Truth says:
    @SMK

    The horrendous and sickening atrocities of the Carr Brothers and Knoxville savages and myriads of other subhuman beasts and monsters who’ve raped and gang-raped, tortured, maimed, brutalized, terrorized, and murdered whites over the last 50 years, clearly motivated to some degree by “racial vengeance,” predominantly in most instances, is “justified, given the cruelties and indignities of the past”?!

    Well hey, y’all tend to get over it…

  149. @anarchyst

    “The self-satisfaction and FUN that they experience has done much to show them that firearms owners are not ogres and maladjusted individuals[...]”

  150. peterAUS says:
    @anarchyst

    A very good post.
    This is highly commendable, of course:

    The range fees and ammunition costs that I incur are well worth seeing the outright enjoyment that they experience.

    My approach: I organize everything, bring the tools and ammo, coach , but they “reimburse” me their fees and ammo they spend.
    And, yes, I take there only people based on criteria “would I like him with me in certain scenario/situation”. Not as “evangelical” and commendable as yours for sure.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  151. peterAUS says:
    @Joe Stalin

    That means the unorganized militia was preparing itself.

    For what I will leave to your imagination.

    That “unorganized” could be a problem there, for several reasons.
    Admit, not much can be done about there at the moment, for several reasons as well.

    What could make some improvement there is:

    Hope that mid-level ex/current military personnel would be part of that effort.

    Work on acquiring leadership skills.
    All material required for a proper study is freely available on the Internet. A college graduate, or any person capable of self-study serious material, can get all the required knowledge in 6 months study, working full time. Unemployed, part times faster, accordingly.

    A shift in thinking is the most important, IMHO, from “me and a couple of my mates” to “the neighborhood” of at least 1000 people living there. Or, start with 100 and build up to 10 000. From a strongpoint of a platoon size (40), at least, to a defensive position of a brigade size (3000). Same principles. METT-T.
    Start small, get basics and build up.

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
  152. anarchyst says:
    @peterAUS

    You are correct. I do critique those who I choose to be a part of my firearms familiarization program very carefully. The enjoyment that both me and my students get and the eye-opening responses are well worth it.

  153. anarchyst says:
    @SMK

    You are correct. As “distasteful” as Jim Crow was to some, it did “keep the peace”. Look where we are at now, with blacks who have declared “war” on whites.

    • Replies: @Truth
  154. Truth says:
    @anarchyst

    Well now, “declaring war” generally involves some type of cohesive plan in totality.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  155. anarchyst says:
    @Truth

    It is obvious that you have never heard of guerilla warfare or non-symmetrical warfare. Sun Tzu would be a good start for you…

    • Replies: @Truth
  156. @peterAUS

    Sounds like a sort of “mini-ROTC” course. Maybe something like “Professor Messer” videos with notes. I can see that. Someone would have to come up with a syllabus of what you would expect to learn.

    Maybe some ROTC instructors might inform us of items of knowledge that are might be included:

    1) Marksmanship
    2) Communications security; Networks are the conveyor belts of capture.
    3) Hand signalling.
    4) Ambushes (L-shaped and otherwise)
    and so forth…

    • Replies: @peterAUS
    , @peterAUS
  157. peterAUS says:
    @Joe Stalin

    Well, correct and, but, then, there is a clincher.
    That stuff shouldn’t be taught on Internet, knowing that certain parties “overseas” could use it.

    ROTC instructors are fine. In fact any instructor is fine as long as he/she has the METT-T right.
    Emphasize on right.

    Based on my own understanding of the METT-T, the syllabus would be based on “defense in MOUT/FIBUA.”

    What is required there, well, that’s the interesting topic and depends on a lot of variables. Most of them depending on “troops” and “terrain”.

    I believe::
    Any US military person, from combat arms, of a rank from a Captain to a Colonel, could devise that syllabus, customized specifically for his/her own town/city/region of living, in a month. Higher the rank, wider the area.

    Teaching that should be tightly managed.
    Very tightly.
    You don’t want to teach wrong parties, among them potential, even possible, opponents.

  158. Truth says:
    @anarchyst

    Well now, I am aware that the war-declaring, guerilla army tends to kill more of the enemy than each other.

    So I’ll pick up Sun Tzu when you amazon a copy of “See Spot Run.”

  159. peterAUS says:
    @Joe Stalin

    This “thread” got to background.
    Nice.
    Less of “background noise” to ignore/skip.

    So….would you like to hear how that …”curriculum”….. thing could be, say, addressed?
    Nothing serious. Just a flow of consciousness sort of thing. An idea or two, maybe.

    • Replies: @peterAUS
  160. @deschutes

    the USA is the ONLY country which has this self-inflicted epidemic of gun violence

    Get out an atlas. You have obviously never heard of Russia, South Africa, Jamaica, Brazil, or Honduras.

  161. For what it’s worth, George Rippey Stewart wrote what is still the best American dictionary of given names. He also published one on place names.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All John Derbyshire Comments via RSS