charlie-hebdo_1

“In light of the Paris attack I think all of us need to stop arguing in favor of ‘concealed’ or ‘open’ carry,” TTAG reader BH emailed. “Instead, we should be advocates for mandatory carry.” Which still begs the question, open or concealed? But I get the point. The writers and employees at the French satire magazine Charlie Hebdo knew they were in the terrorists’ sights. Their offices had been firebombed. Police were stationed outside the door. And yet they all showed up for work unarmed. So while I understand the sentiment, it makes the hashtag #jesuischarlie and the “I Am Charlie” posters a bad joke. I see that as a declaration that they are also defenseless potential victims. #jesuisuncanardassis is more like it. I am a sitting duck. Is that cold of me? Oh well. La vérité fait mal.

 

Recommended For You

106 Responses to Je Suis Charlie? Mais Non!

  1. It’s cheap social media courage. If you want to show how big your package is go to your local mosque and politely ask the Imam to preach a sermon condemning these murders. Anything short of that is faux heroics.

    And another thing, anybody who does not support Israel after this attack is a fricking Nazi. This kind thing has been a constant threat from the same thugs who murdered the staff of Charlie Hebdo since the founding of Israel in 1948. This should be a message to all those lovers of the Palestinian Arabs. When they finish with the Jews they are coming for you.

    • Well they better come hard and come packing. This particular Texan ain’t no disarmed frog talker. I’m relatively well armed on any particular day. And I’ll push the button sending any terrorist that’s in the way to the 70!virgins express lane ( hint jihadi joe, there virgins cuz they are ugly and bad in bed. When Allah starts offering 99 sluts then maybe I’ll convert. ) and so will almost every armed Texan I know over age 12. So the islamo-fascists , and that’s what they are, better remember the Alamo and keep to attacking Frenchmen or New Yorkers. Stay in the slave states pal, come to texas and try that shit and we’ll kick your ass.

      • No, let me take them out. I’m a woman and they are terrified of dying at a woman’s hands because apparently we women are such subhuman scum and it’s so shameful for a muslim man to die at the hands of one of us that they not only lose their virgins, they go to hell. Whenever possible, dudes, let the armed ladies handle this one. 😉

        • And tell them that you’ll perform the autopsy and burial after. It’s taboo for a non-muslim to touch the corpse of a muslim. Being a woman would probably make it worse. Would you be willing to convert to Judaism first? And become a lesbian? Not much could top that.

        • Every woman should have a Tavor. Nothing says “FU” like a barrel stamped “Made in Israel”.

        • @Jason, yes I would be willing to become a lesbian jew in order to cause maximum horror after I killed the muslim terrorist using bacon fat and then touched them with my dirty non-muslim, woman, jew, lesbian hands.

          Yes, I’m on it. 😉

        • Grease your rounds in pig fat too. Women, bacon rounds and non-muslim autopsy. Bring it.

    • So…because some stupid people did something stupid, those of us who don’t support a fascist country that restricts private ownership of firearms, spies on its citizens, taxes them heavily to pay for subsidies to people with friends in the Knesset, basically most of the things Americans dislike about the modern US government, must be Nazis? That’s some good logic there.

      Oh! I forgot a couple: refuses to abide by the NNTP treaty, refuses to abide by treaties against chemical and biological weapons, spies on the US government, US military, and US-based companies, and the biggie: spends millions of dollars in campaign contributions to influence US politics, which is more than covered by the billions in stolen US Taxpayer money the US government gives to Israel.

      Actually, I think if we resurrected some Nazis and described Israel to them, without mentioning the Jewish connection, they’d be pretty impressed.

        • Ignoring the childish insult that you seem to hurl all to regularly (can you not think of anything original?), I do wonder why if you had any real critique of my core statement, you didn’t bother to post it. Let me guess: my post isn’t worthy of a real response. Or, much like the gun grabbers this site regularly quotes, you like to resort to name calling when somebody challenges your irrational views.

          And here it is in brief, in case you do want to respond like an adult:
          Israel’s government is not some utopia of freedom, and not a friend to the American people. The fact that some terrorists who are in conflict with Israel attack France (or even if they attacked the US), doesn’t mean people should support Israel blindly. It certainly doesn’t mean that anyone who doesn’t is a Nazi.
          Iran is a staunch opponent of ISIS. He might as well have said anyone who doesn’t support Iran now is a Nazi.

        • Now Jason, I think your analogy is a bit off. The defining characteristic of the Nazi is Jew hatred. Just because Iran doesn’t like ISIS doesn’t make them less Nazi-like If the Muslim Brotherhood is the Nazi party then Iran is Ustasi.

        • @tdiinva
          The popular view of Nazis is the hatred of Jews, because Hitler was an antisemite (the word doesn’t seem quite strong enough in this case), as were many of the principal members. The Nazi party was the National Socialist party, very similar to the Fascists in Italy and Spain at the time. Their core principals were a strong central government that repressed dissent, aggressive expansion, and a militaristic society. Israel has some of those properties (as does the USA), but not to the same extent.

          Iran is quite Nazi like. They’re more left-wing socialist, than right-wing socialist, but it’s definitely not a bastion of freedom. That was my point. ISIS is a big pile of evil that needs to suck on the business end of a gun barrel. But that doesn’t mean we should blindly jump into bed with their enemies.
          US support of Stalin, because he was slightly less evil than Hitler, put him in a strong position after the war to take over Eastern Europe. Whereas, had the US & UK left him to fend for himself, they could have easily implemented Patton’s advice and liberated Europe all the way to Moscow.

        • Geez, Jason are you that ignorant? Italian Fascism is entirely different from Nazism. And Franco wasn’t a Fascist. He took their support but not their ideology. He hate politics and politicians of all stripes.

          You might want to refer to you copy of Mein Kampf to check on the fundamental nature of race and anti-Antisemitism in Nazi Ideology.

          Another hearty Sieg Heil to you!

      • I know a lot of people joke about Israel being the 51st State but the last time I checked they are independent nation not covered by the US Constitution. Their laws are set by a democratically elected Parliament. You may not like their laws so don’t live there. However, they will take your tourist dollars and show you a really good time. I have it on good authority that Israeli women are hot although my experience with Jewish women in America is that they tend to be liberal harpies. However, as a German Lutheran I might not get the warm welcome that Robert might get.

        So I will give you three hearty Sieg Heils! for your effort.

        • There are decades worth of documented evidence about Israel’s excessive influence in DC. As well as the many Israeli spies caught spying on the US. But they get away with it all, because saying anything short of “I support Israel unconditionally”, is political suicide in this country.

        • Jason,

          Obama clearly didn’t get that memo. He seems more pro-muslim than anything. And a LOT of people in Washington have voiced pro-palestinian views. Maybe what you say was true ten years ago, but it’s not true now.

          I’m more pro-israel than anything else, but that’s merely because I think anybody who is fighting the goat herders who want to shroud me in a black ghost outfit, not let me drive, and behead me if I don’t like any of that, is my friend at least temporarily.

          Israel certainly has it’s own bad policies, but until they declare “jihad” on western civilization… enemy of my enemy is my friend.

        • I won’t necessarily disagree with the Israel lobby in DC (nor do I have any general issues with it either) but as for the spying aspect, I don’t hold it against them since their survival depends on weeding through the diplomatic b.s. that is spewed in public by everyone. Also, Israel is hardly the only “allied” country that spies on us, France and Germany are quite up there, for both political and industrial espionage. I was also briefed one time that not long ago France wanted the same intelligence sharing agreement as FVEY( United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand) arrangement. Besides the language issue, we supposedly asked them to clarify on a key number of “espionage” activities by them on the U.S. Apparently they dropped their request shortly after.

  2. It angers and sickens me, not so much that it happened, but that they had the time to simply walk in, do a roll call, and execute the people, and still had time left over to kill a few (possibly unarmed) cops before casually leaving the city, never to be found.

    I am fairly certain this could not have happened anywhere in the US. They might have made it as far as killing the journalists but they would have hit a wall of hot lead the moment they left the building.

  3. The problem is that we are living under the constant threat of some type of terrorist attack. Many wants us to be barred completely from a means of defense others wanted it tailored so as not to offend. The legal prohibitions in many areas even with our gains still place us at a disadvantage. OCing a long gun upsets people but in the context of Paris does it not make sense? Maybe at least pushing for more legal standing for leaving guns in your car at work?
    For many years we were blessed not to be like the middle east or Europe (in the 80s) now Americans should know without question terrorist want us dead, not just our soldiers or symbols. Men,women and children just like in Syria.

    • How are we living under the constant threat of terrorist attack? You might as well say we’re living under the constant threat of asteroid-based annihilation, or supervolcano eruption.
      The probability of getting killed by a terrorist is minimal. It’s somewhere between getting hit by lightning and eaten by a shark in Kansas.

      • Your statistics are a cold comfort to people who are killed by terrorists, hit by lightning or eaten by sharks.

        In fact, the odds of any one of those things happening is less than me meeting a totally mor0nic horse’s @ss on TTAG, yet here you are. Go figure.

        • HA!

          And technically to the original commenter, we ARE under constant threat from asteroid-annilhilation (though we can track that somewhat we may or may not be able to do anything to stop or minimize damage) or a supervolcano eruption. But there isn’t that much we can do about those things. Terrorist attacks, on the other hand, you have a better chance of surviving, armed. If we had a real survival protocol for “giant asteroid” or “supervolcano”, some would take those precautions, particularly if a volcano got rumbly or we spotted an asteroid headed our way.

        • I never meant it to be comfort. If you’d like a take away from it: the threat of terrorist attack is so low for the average American, it’s not really worth taking special precautions against. The sort of precautions most of us take against random crime are probably good enough.

          As for the “mor0nic horse’s @ss”, one of us is making valuable contributions, the other is running around like a child insulting people. Perhaps you should try a mirror to get that introduction.

        • @Summer
          The phrase constant threat implies that there’s some sort of significant risk. Your risks of dying in a car crash are far higher, but do you avoid all cars because of that? Probably not. The rational response is to drive safely, in a safe car, with your seatbelt on, which greatly reduces the risks, and then to have insurance (auto, medical, and life) to deal with the results of an accident.
          Given the minimal probability of being the victim of a terrorist attack, the rational response, is to be alert in public, particularly high risk areas, like the NYC subway, have some strategies for escaping a threat, and (if possible) be armed to deal with threats. But those are probably the same strategies most of us follow to protect ourselves from street crime.
          Much more than that would be overkill, expending time, effort, and money on something that will likely never happen.

        • @Bob
          Thanks Bob, I’m glad I’m not the only one who sees that as being uncalled for.
          Normally I find Ralph’s posts intelligent, insightful, and quite witty. Maybe he’s just having a bad day.

        • Jason,

          I take constant threat to mean it’s something that is a threat at any/all times. Not necessarilly the personal level of risk. Interpret my comments in that light, please.

          I also don’t think anybody is suggesting that people need to tool up any more than they normally would to combat random violence. Terrorism IS random violence. But I do think the threat is higher not for terrorism specifically but for random violence than it might have been in the past. Even though overall crime rates are down everywhere in the US (a good thing), a lot of that crime has become more randomized.

          It used to be primarily a “bad neighborhood” thing. If you stayed out of stupid places and avoided doing stupid things nothing bad was likely to randomly happen. But now it’s more in middle class suburbs. It’s walmarts and movie theaters and schools and workplace violence. When you add in terrorism you’re just adding in more of the same “random violence”. Then you add in things like the knock out game and that’s more random violence.

          The sense of randomness is what makes it more threatening than just whatever the bald statistics are. That’s why Ralph says it’s cold comfort to the people who ARE affected.

          If random violence happens to you, it happened 100% in your case. So it didn’t really matter what your odds were. Your number came up.

          I don’t think anybody is suggesting that anybody needs to take any extra precautions to deal with terrorism than they would have taken already to deal with random violence. The issue “here” is that FRANCE doesn’t really have gun rights. And in some parts of our own country people have severely restricted gun rights.

          But because random violence often gets publicized heavily, particularly terrorist or school violence, the added media coverage adds to the fear of the general population. So yeah… more people will want to be armed to protect themselves, no matter the statistical risk.

      • Oh yes…the probability statement, fine logic, entirely truthful and invokes submission to the state for your protection. Odds means nothing presented with the reality of of mad men.

        • At no point did I suggest, or even hint about submission to the state. Not just in that post, but ever. Since birth.
          I pointed out that the probability of being a victim of a terrorist attack is minimal, as opposed to the parent post’s use of the words constant threat of some type of terrorist attack.

        • I can’t speak for Adam, but when he said “we are under constant threat of terrorist attack”, I think he meant “the country”, not each individual human being living here. When most random violence happen we don’t see it necessarily as an affront to our nation. But when terrorism happens, particularly with muslim extremists, I think we take it personally even if we aren’t personally a victim of that specific attack. It’s an affront on our nation’s pride, our values and civilization and our rule of law. It’s not just a random act of violence. It’s an act meant to chip away at our entire culture.

          I know when 9/11 happened, I took that shit pretty personally even though I wasn’t in NY and nobody I knew was either.

  4. Europe will learn nothing from this. Nothing. And the takeaway for Barack Hussein Obama will be to push for more civilian disarmament to protect Muslims. That’s guaranteed.

    If 9/11 didn’t wake us up, what will a Mumbai-style attack on New York City do? Nothing.

    • Wow, you took the words right out of my mouth, Ralph. I see photos of all these French masses, holding their ‘vigils’ in the street, all for nought. What do they want to change? Absolutely nothing. “Just make the bad man go away so we can resume our lives as passive sheep.”

      While I have no ill-will for them, I find it similarly difficult to pity them. Progressives ‘choose’ to live with this nonsense.

      • I feel like they’re helpless children and we need more adults running the world. More children is just more dependents for everyone else to feed and clothe and protect. I’m sorry the world is so big and bad and hard, but once you reach the age of majority, you should be at least working toward some form of self reliance and dealing with the ultimate reality of your own mortality. These people refuse to, which just gives us a world full of children in bigger bodies all running everything based on their fears and “I want I want so give it to me” demands.

        • Let’s not forget all the demands that begin with “I have a right to…” and “I deserve…” as well as the always-popular “Well somebody should…”

          The “I wants” I can mostly get; we all have wants as well as needs. But the sense of entitlement, well … that never went down well in the L. household when I was growing up.

        • Well, none of their rights mean anything and will be revoked in short order without the second amendment, so they can keep prattling on about “their rights” until they manage to get rid of 2A, then they’ll understand their own foolishness.

    • We all better be Mark Vaughn. Our turn is coming. And the traitor in the White House will call it “workplace violence,” or “movie theater violence,” or “shopping mall violence,” while his talking heads in the media will decry Islamophobia.

      • It’ll be labeled “gun violence” and the gun will have caused the terrorist to convert to Islam, get radicalized, and instantly trained them.

  5. When the next Muslim terrorist attack in the U.S. happens, it will be in one of our big, liberal, disarmed, defenseless cities.

    Now I need to go back to dipping my hollow points in bacon grease.

    • When the next Muslim terrorist attack in the U.S. happens, it will be in one of our big, liberal, disarmed, defenseless cities.

      Which pretty much includes every big city in America.

        • Phoenix still has its blue areas, so it is not an absolute. There are a few malls and other public venues I would classify as free fire zones. But elsewhere, if 1 out of 10 people aren’t carrying, I would be surprised.

  6. Man I know I am going to get flamed for this but I have to say it. Mandatory carry is just like mandatory Heath insurance. You should not not be forced to buy any thing. My wife also pointed out that if they can mandate carry…..they can turn around and mandated no carry at all. It’s a slippery slope folks.

    Unfortunately you can not legislate personal responsibility or morality. I think there are enough of us left willing to run into danger to save others that mandatory any thing is not needed

    • No, you’re correct, of course. All of us should remember we’re the well-regulated militia. The security of our free State depends on us.

    • @Higgs, you are absolutely correct. So, I carry for me, and the sheeple be damned. Because they cannot be stripped of their right to choose defenselessness, and I cannot be stripped of my right not to care.

  7. I am not mandatory anything. Personal responsibility is the optimum value.

    I have too much heritage back with these wimpy Frenchmen to be proud of it. Thankfully, I am removed for about 300 years, from before the French migration to the Louisiana Region, so I can say Cajun heritage and not French. Cajuns learned to live from the land and water. Guns and fishing poles and lines, and nets were our tools of trade and putting food on the table of our families.

    We have legal open carry and just about everyone, including judges have gun racks on their pickups with guns in the racks. Easy concealed carry and we access it and are working to have the fees for any easy safety course tax deductible, Most neighbors carry. Most friends carry. All family carries.

    It was all unnecessary.

    Je ne suis pas Charlie!

    • Nah, Cajuns are a totally different breed than French. I mean, you guys sometimes deal with alligators, don’t you? Those things are terrifying.

      • That is what we Cajuns claim anyway, though the French want to continually claim us with “cultural exchanges” and “twin city” programs…ha! About a decade ago, a famous French saucier came to our area for one of these “exchanges” and presumed to show us how to cook sauces. I was asked to taste it, and though it was rich with cream, it did not have the taste of which we are accustomed, so I mentioned it needed something that resulted in a great dramatic response. The next day, I brought him some ettouffee sauce with some crawfish in it, and a side of seasoned south Louisiana pecan rice to prove my point and he became an instant convert.

        I am not so sure, however, it is the Cajun men who are our advantage. I would say it is our Cajun wives. My red head most especially. We have our Community Coffee here about 4 am and then get in a day’s work by about noon, and keep working after lunch, unlike the French who gather at cafe’s for half the day or more.

    • The gene pool in France has never recovered from losing the Cajuns to North America. I grew up in Louisiana and would want a Cajun at my side if the shooting started. Cajuns know how to shoot, cook, and have a good time. What more could you ask for?

  8. If you take away anything let it be this:
    10 minutes give or take and not another policier to be found.
    If you are under death threats from mindless fanatics maybe you should be armed at all times.
    My biggest WTF? Is that not one person in any of those windows or on the roofs had any weapons! Really ?

    • The French know: guns are dangerous, you’re much safer in the home without one. And certainly no need for one of those military style “assault weapons” with 30 magazine clips…

      • The only thing that stops a bad guy with “one of those military style “assault weapons” with 30 magazine clips…” is a good guy with “one of those military style “assault weapons” with 30 magazine clips…

        When Bush declared a “war on terrorism”, I think a lot of people, particularly in the government, didn’t realize terrorism being what it is means a “war on it” makes every citizen a soldier. So gun control people are not thinking at all tactically on this.

  9. I haven’t yet discovered whether the police pretending to be body guards were armed. The two officers that rode up to the scene on bikes weren’t, but were the officers inside also unarmed?
    I can’t help but recall Rob Schneider’s line in Demolition Man, “We’re police officers, we’re not trained to handle this kind of violence.”
    It sounds to me like pretty much everyone is unarmed over in Paris. It’s the city of light, not the city of packing heat. Cops unarmed? When was this sort of policy ever a good idea? What happened to the mothers axiom that states, “It’s better to have it and not need it, than need it and not have it.” So most of our mothers are/were smarter than the French Gendarme policy maker(s)? Go figure.

  10. I am listening to the whining nonsense on CNN as I write this. A really sad example of “when you need the police in seconds, they are minutes away. Or already dead.” Have to agree with you all. There will be an attack in the US, and it will be in NY, LA, or DC, all full of easy disarmed targets. (If it were in Chicago, no-one would notice. Just another drive-by.) The police may well immediately kill the perps, but that’s Jihad for them, so long as they have killed their targets first. It won’t happen in Atlanta, Dallas, or Houston, for obvious reasons already discussed. What I really do not understand, however, is the naive denial of the intended victims that they either need to be armed personally, if in a country where they can be, or at least hire more armed guards. There recently was a knife murder of a Hassidic Jewish guy in Brooklyn while in a synagogue. Back a few decades ago when certain other feral types were harassing that neighborhood, the neighborhood protected itself with “vigilante” patrols carrying baseball bats and shotguns. They were called the Jewish Defense League, and were branded as terrorists by government and media in both the US and I think even Israel. But as I recall, both the NYPD and the perps took notice and miraculously the problems ended. And now the problems are back both in Brooklyn and of course in Paris, as we never seem to be able to learn from history.

    • “… when you need the police in seconds, they are minutes away. Or already dead.”

      Love it! That is my new mantra. Here is the shortened version:

      — When seconds count, the police are only minutes away … or dead.

  11. When I heard the magazine had police protection, I assumed that meant well armed shooters. Instead, it appears that the “protection” were no more than additional, helpless victims.

    Countless suicide bombings have shown that Muslim radicals are willing to die in order to kill those who disagree with them. However, suicide is forbidden by the Koran. Therefore, the best deterrence is to show them that, when they try, they will die as failures, not successful martyrs.

    When you persist in poking the bear, sooner or later, the bear will get pissed and strike back. Journalists think they should be free to publish derogatory, insulting, and, frequently, inaccurate material about anyone they choose. When their targets retaliate, the journalists become highly indignant. Without in any way excusing the attack on Charlie Hebdo, I think attacking the roots of a major religion is both stupid and counterproductive. When Martin Luther began the Reformation, he criticized corrupt practices with the Church but not Christianity itself. Today, few Roman Catholics would object to a publication that condemned pedophile priests or the Church officials who have protected them. However, they would be sorely offended by one that mocked Jesus or implied a connection between Him and pedophilia. Similarly, I think that only Muslim radicals would object to a publication that portrayed ISIS leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, as baby-killer-in-chief or pointed out the hypocracy of an imam who complains bitterly about discrimination against Muslims but remains silent about Muslim atrocities.

    • All those things have been done to mock Christianity and Judaism in the past thirty years yet adherents to either faith have not struck back. It is because the God of the Old and New Testament always gets the last word. The God of the Koran is not so sure of himself and must smite the unbelievers lest they get the better of him.

    • Agree 100%. Jokes about rape are funny except to rape victims. Jokes about black people are funny unless you are black. Jokes about blonds or gingers are funny unless you are a blonde or a ginger. Even that joke about the guy slipping on the banana peel is funny unless you are the guy slipping on the banana peel. So let’s be clear about this- jokes about Mohammad and Islam are funny unless you are Muslim. Freedom of speech, press, satire and or comedy does not mean carte blanche to throw insults without repercussions nor does devote faith give them the right to kill those that insult them. BOTH parties are wrong here and BOTH should start showing a little respect and decency.

      • My son is even more the mutt than I am. I told him be sure to liberally use every ethnic slur that applies to him because when you use them you own them and take those words away from those would ridicule or insult you. As I said above Muslims should credit their god with a little more confidence than they seem to think he has.

      • I’m not going to show respect to backwoods goat herders with an ideology that considers me less than human because I’m a woman and that, if in power, would seek to take away all of my rights. Sorry never. F them, and F Allah up the ass with a dildo greased in pig fat. The Koran is a morally despicable book, and while I carry no ill will toward the followers of the less insane form of Islam, it’s really just a soft pedal of a deeply harmful and hateful ideology.

        Seriously F them.

        And rape jokes aren’t funny to anybody who has any decency, full stop. I can’t speak to those who don’t.

        • Summer, I wonder if you feel the same way about Christian men whom think less of you because you are a woman and that they use the Bible as their justification?

        • You say that rape jokes aren’t funny to anyone with any decency – and then you said this:

          F them, and F Allah up the ass with a dildo greased in pig fat.

          I’m a little confused about what your definition of the word “decency” is and if you understand what the definition of hypocrite is.

        • Yes, A-Rod, I feel the same way about Christians who treat women as subhuman. But the reality is… despite some misogyny still present in the Christian faith it’s not even in the same solar system of the psycho in the Muslim faith. Though there are some CRAZY Christian groups like Dominionists. When they start getting the kind of numbers and power that Muslim extremists have, then I’ll pay attention to their stupidity, too.

        • Anonymous:

          A. That wasn’t a rape joke. It would be more on the level of a rape threat against an imaginary being.

          B. Allah is not real. A rape threat against an imaginary being is a little stupid to get upset about. Meanwhile ACTUAL rape jokes tend to be made against real human beings.

          I’m not a hypocrite. You just don’t know the difference in a joke and active defiance of imaginary bullshit that is hurting the entire world.

      • Agreed, if I started a publication showing Jesus enjoying a rape session or any other ridiculousness. I would expect reprisal – especially living in the Bible Belt.

        • Criticism? Sure. Reprisals? Maybe pranks or at the most threatening messages. Christian gunman coming into your workplace and executing everyone as they called out their names and then shooting their way out because you satirized Christ, Christianity or both? Yeah no.

          You’re moral equivalence syndrome is truly devoid of any intellectual exercise in reasoning.

        • You think anywhere in America, a band of rifle wielding maniacs would storm a newspaper office and kill a dozen people, shouting “Jesus saves!” or anything similar? I can’t agree. Reprisal would if anything, take the form of slashed tires, rocks thrown through the windows, or at most a savage beating in the street in front of the office.

          All of which are still evil, but nowhere close in the degree. I’m not aware of any church in this entire country as hateful and insane as the Westboro Baptists, and I don’t think even they advocate killing unbelievers.

          Edit- Yellow Devil, you beat me to it.

  12. You could argue that changing up your life also makes them win. I understand the sentiment for being armed, but at the same time, you shouldn’t fear something just because they threaten you. The point is that you have to be willing to die for your freedoms and in a way, them dying the way they did does more than if they were armed. I know it’s odd, but the martyrdom of those at Charlie Hebdo makes it more powerful and proof that we need to stand up against these guys. As he said, “I’d rather die standing than live on my knees” so you carry on as if the terrorists bull shit doesn’t matter show them you’re not scared. So no, being armed is somewhat irrelevant. The cops being unarmed is far more worrying and sad (on a different level).

    • ^ That’s a whole mess of screwed-up logic right there.
      “The point is that you have to be willing to die for your freedoms…”

      Bull.

      “No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.”
      George S. Patton

      • @Curtis: What? So then what would you fight for? You just fight to kill? You need an ideal otherwise you just go home. I never said you don’t fight, but you don’t strip away the very things you value or change your behavior simply because people get killed. If you don’t like guns you don’t have to use them or be forced to. Yet they are doing this BECAUSE of their ideals. Patton was borderline sane at best. A good general, but he also wanted to invade Russia.

        @George: Assuming you want one. So yes, anytime you change your behavior and let fear control your daily life they very much do win. Why do you think people wave the bloody flag?

        @ Summer: Carrying IS about fear; that’s why you carry because you think something will happen. I don’t carry, yet I don’t fear anything happening to me. You shouldn’t be forced to have arms beside you to use your basic civil rights. Heaven for them is technically guaranteed when they die so 72 virgins will happen (according to their beliefs) so you carrying or shooting them is irrelevant. If criminals worried about consequences, then how come the death penalty doesn’t work (especially in Texas)? Also, my comment was not defeatist at all.

        • “You shouldn’t be forced to have arms beside you to use your basic civil rights.”

          While that is an admirable sentiment, it ignores the real world. Two-bit thugs, violent sociopaths, bureaucrats, politicians, religious and environmental terrorists, and tyrannical despots abound in the real world and will promptly relieve you of your civil rights without any hesitation or qualms whatsoever.

          And the reality in our nation is that something like 2 million people are victims of violent crime every year. Even more discouraging, your odds of being the victim of a violent crime over the course of 20 years in cities like Oakland, California or Memphis, Tennessee are about 1 out of 3. In those cases it is prudent to be armed and prepared.

        • Sorry, I still disagree. Carrying isn’t about fear. Anymore than having a fire extinguisher in your house is about fear. I carry because the world is full of evil and I won’t be its victim, not because I fear that evil. Because I want to make sure that evil rues the day it woke up and came after me.

        • Also. NO… I am a woman and the jihadists believe they don’t get paradise and 72 virgins if a woman kills them. So, according to their own beliefs, they would NOT get their 72 virgins if I stopped them. This is basically why the Kurds sent in several all-female military units to fight ISIS. They’ve got a ton of stupid superstitions that can be used against them in psychological warfare. Others have mentioned the abject terror over non-muslims touching the corpses of muslims as well as their bizarrely unhealthy fixation on avoiding any contact with bacon/pig fat.

          Nobody said you “had” to carry a gun to have basic civil rights, but make no mistake, your rights ARE guaranteed, protected, and defended with violence. If you don’t want to get your hands dirty, that’s fine. But outsourcing your violence to police or military doesn’t change the fact that without violence, you would have zero freedom of any kind. The world trends toward tyranny, not everybody getting along and holding hands and singing songs.

    • If changing your life to include a Tavor next to your bed is a “win” for the terrorists then the terrorists deserve the prize they will collect.

    • That’s pretty defeatist. And frankly someone comes to my country and tries to hurt us and what freedoms we have left? I WANT to hurt them. Carrying is not about fear. It’s about empowering yourself to not become some sick asshole’s victim. Let every violent deviant know there are consequences… swift and immediate consequences to F’ing with the American people. And let no jihadist fail to comprehend: We arm our women here so heaven and 72 virgins is by no means guaranteed. If my bullet gets you, according to your whackadoo beliefs, welcome to hell.

  13. +1 Ralph. JasonM is a horses@ss. How did this degenerate into an anti-semitic diatribe? Only one country inthe middle east worth a damn-and it ain’t Jordan. To those of us believers Barry soetoro is cursing America all on his own. “I will bless them that bless you and curse those that curse you.” And I sure remember a bunch of Palestinians and Egyptians celebrating after 911. The French are hopeless. I hope WE aren’t…

  14. Je Suis Charley is only half right. As I saw posted elsewhere it should be ‘Je Suis Charley Martel’, the time to coddle and enable the savages is long past.

  15. I am the “BH” that Robert opened the conversation with. I sent him the statement, concerning mandating carry for everyone, because it should be obvious that the folks in Paris died because they were disarmed by both their government and most probably their own philosophy.

    If total gun control is obviously not working then the answer obviously must be in a change of direction.

    Robert Heinlein wrote a story called “Beyond This Horizon” where everyone that wanted to be armed was and they were allowed to participate in public dueling to satisfy arguments. The quote “An armed society is a polite society” came from that book.

    A more contemporary SciFi writer, Michael Z. Williamson in “Freehold” described a society where everyone was armed legally much to the dismay of some off world punks who attempt a robbery from a park vendor.

    I very much enjoyed both books and while Mr. Heinlein is long gone, Mr. Williamson is still writing very topical and well thought out works.

    I had an acquaintance ridicule the organization “Guns Save Lives” and when I attempted to explain how that name was actually a well documented fact, he included me in his ridicule.

    But the fact remains, guns can take lives like they did in Paris but they can also save lives as it is demonstrated everyday throughout the country be legally armed Americans.

    Mandated carry of a firearm is probably a stupid idea because anything mandated is stupid. But it is no more stupid than declaring an area or an entire country as “gun free zone”.

    I am old, i suspect I don’t have all that much time left so I may not actually see all of the US allowed constitutional carry but that’s no reason for me to stop pushing for it.

    So, the question remains, since banned ownership is costing innocent lives, and mandated carry is stupid, what’s the answer?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *