Britain

The new Mossad director, Tamir Pardo, will get his first taste of conflict next month. Not from Iran or any of the Arab countries, not even from the UN. It will come from Britain, most likely in the form of Foreign Secretary William Hague, who, you may remember, quickly condemned Israel over the Mavi Marvara incident before the facts were even known.

Tamir Pardo

London’s ‘Telegraph’ newspaper, which is usually one of the more trustworthy dailies, has reported that Pardo will apologize for the use of British passports in the Mahmoud al-Mabhouh affair, the Hamas official killed in Dubai a year ago. It goes on to say that Pardo will explain that he personally condemned the use of foreign passports before the alleged assassination took place.

I might be wrong on this, but it sure looks like they are trying to make nicey-nicey with the new guy on the block. While they are afraid of an ensuing backlash should they show forgiveness to incumbent Meir Dagan, they have invented a story which absolves the new chief of any blame. The fact is, Tamir Pardo was not active within Mossad at that time.

The British strategy is twofold. Firstly, they could put the passport issue to bed, blaming the previous director while absolving his replacement. Secondly, they could look at re-installing the Mossad station chief who was expelled over the incident.

In Skip’s article of November 26, 2010, ‘What’s With The Brits?’, he questioned the motives of MI6 when they condemned the use of the Stuxnet virus against Iran. Some very strange things are happening within the agency circles these days. Conflicting stories regarding the death of one of its agents, for one thing. It’s understandable that some facts are concealed from the public for security reasons… that’s partly the reason for their existence. But in these post cold-war years, and with their stated intention of becoming ‘more open’, questions must be asked.

It was notable, in the recent reports of the arrests of twelve suspected terrorists in Britain, that the entire operation was conducted by the police, including Scotland Yard’s Anti-Terrorist Unit. So where, then, are MI5 and MI6?

Their main role is that of intelligence gathering, which may explain their apparent absence in news stories covering the arrests of terrorists. Given that Britain is the greatest breeding ground for muslim extremists in the western world, should they not be a little more pro-active? The recent ‘sting’ by the FBI in Portland, Oregon was an example of early prevention, although it was condemned by CAIR as ‘entrapment’. That’s laughable, considering the fact that many of these folks openly shout in the streets about their intentions for America and the west.

Next month’s meeting in London will see the British government trying to play the upper hand. They desperately need the intelligence that can only be provided by Israel. The reinstatement of a Mossad officer in London in exchange for top secrets is not a fair deal. At the very least, Pardo should demand the guarantee of free movement in Britain for Israeli government officials, such as Dan Meridor, without the fear of arrest on trumped-up ‘war crimes’ charges.

Britain is not the clear-cut country of World War Two, when they knew without doubt who the bad guys were… good or bad, friend or enemy. Its subservience to the EU and UN, not to mention its weak-kneed pandering to dangerous elements within its own borders, make it dangerous and a nation not to be trusted. It’s true to form that it is more concerned over faked passports than the hundreds of real UK passports held by terrorists.

A couple of tips from my list of rules before your meeting, Mr Pardo: Rule #1 – Trust no-one; Rule #4 – Only tell them what you want them to know.

(Editor Dee is in for Skip today)

Watching the total anarchy playing out in London’s streets… An out-of-control, mindless mob of social welfare government-created clones, clamoring for more and more from a government which has no more to give. Which has had no more to give for a long time. We are witnessing the collapse of the classic nanny state.

Told that the government was going to have to raise school tuition fees, these ‘students’, as the ever cowardly lame stream press is calling them, are the direct result of government welfare cradle-to-grave entitlements.

It seems the police have been so neutered they cannot even protect the royal family any longer. A couple of those cretins came very close to laying hands on the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall, who actually took a jab in the ribs from a stick… it could have as easily been a knife. How did the supposedly armored Rolls have a window open to start with and where were the security guys?

Then there’s the story that the street cops and the Prince’s escorts were on different frequencies. I think the government of Britain and its people have been on different frequencies for a long time.

A socialist thug attacks the royal car

The fact that these mindless, vicious anarchists are being directed cannot be discounted. An experienced crowd control guy can pretty much pick out the agitators and the organizers. I no more believe that these riots are spontaneous than that the moon is made of Brie.

But they sure can be instructive as to what we can expect here in this country if we don’t seize history here and now, and change the course that Barack Obama and his Marxists have tried to put us on. I’m with Larry Kudlow on this. The ‘tax cuts’, which are in fact not cuts at all but just a reprieve from the steeply increased income taxes foisted on us by Bill Clinton, are the necessary fuel to get small business going again.

I remember those taxes…they hurt badly. Larry’s calling the tax plan a good start to get business moving again, and he’s right. It’s significant that Barack Obama had to bring in Bubba to explain why raising taxes, in an already disastrously weakened economy with people unemployed for years, with homes and businesses being lost, might not be such a good idea.

The left is howling mad. They feel the country slipping from what they thought for sure was the fast grip of socialist penury. You want to see what that would look like? Look at Europe.

The left is blind to anything outside its ideological focus. The complete and virtually universal American rejection of socialism and all it stands for has blindsided them. They’re lashing around like a beheaded snake… but no less dangerous for that.

Semper Vigilans, Semper Fidelis

© Skip MacLure 2010

The London Daily Telegraph got its panties in a huge wad over comments made by Israeli President Shimon Peres, that England was deeply pro-Arab and anti-Israeli. I guess the truth must sting.

Queen Elizabeth presents Shimon Peres with the Order of St Michael and St George at Buckingham Palace, November 2008.

Naturally, some of England’s ‘senior’ MPs, probably serving the same function there as our ever-bloviating John ‘Gunboats’ Kerry, were irate. Too bad they were not half as irate about surrendering a goodly part of their sovereignty to the Islamo-fascists, who are undermining British society on every level. I don’t see the Israelis with one legal system for their Jewish citizens and Sharia courts for Muslims in their midst, nor would they tolerate it for a second… but then they don’t have a death wish.

At least the Israelis know and recognize who and what the enemy is. After all, your own police, who by all accounts have had their powers and authority so diminished as to make them, and by extension your judicial system, a sad joke. Your police won’t go in to the Muslim slums around London without risking riot or death.

It’s no secret that friction has existed between the Jewish peoples of Palestine and Judea and England since the Balfour Declaration and the British Mandate. The Jewish peoples had been returning slowly but steadily to their lost homeland for centuries, and by the time of the mandate there were already some 100,000 Jews in Palestine.

After World War Two, large numbers of homeless, displaced Jewish people aided by Zionist organizations were reaching the Holy Land. It’s no secret that the British had self serving ‘agreements’ to limit the number of Jews reaching Palestine in favor of the Arabs. The infamous ‘White Paper’ of 1941 saw to this. It resulted in the rise of the Jewish resistance groups such as the Haganah, 1920-1948, and the Irgun, 1931-1948, who were in active revolt against the British authority and waged all but open war against the Arabs who were trying to crush them.

The Jewish memory is long, and they see England as an enemy of Zionism and the Israeli people. They read the British press as well as we do, and I’m here to tell you that it is generally very pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli.

They see what is occurring in Britain, whose leadership is so feckless that it cannot stand up to the Islamist viper they have taken to their breast. Militant Islam is anti-semitism incarnate. Even weak-willed Belgium, the Netherlands and France have seen the light and are moving against the implacable foes within. So when the Israelis say that England is anti-semitic, they have reason.

Semper Vigilans, Semper Fidelis

© Skip MacLure 2010

If there is one thing that really gets under my skin, it’s double standards. Politics is full of it, you see news items nearly every day about elected officials doing a full 180° turn on important issues.

Often, they will excuse it away with comments like ‘my words were taken out of context’ or ‘I misunderstood the question’. Thanks to modern media technology, the first excuse can be easily disproved with a quick replay of the original interview or a quick search of YouTube. As for the ‘misunderstanding’ – it’s worrying that so many powerful figures don’t have a basic grasp of their own language.

While I’m on the subject of the media, it’s interesting to note that Obama is holding a press conference today, his first in 308 days. So much for the ‘transparency’ that he promised and the ‘monthly press conference’ he spoke of as a Presidential candidate. Maybe he thought there would be more good news to share with the American public after his election? It’s pretty difficult using a teleprompter to answer ‘off-the-cuff’ questions and rumor has it that he has a team of programmers designing software that can instantaneously display the ‘correct’ answer to any query!

He really has embraced technology with the creation of the official White House news channel. Who needs questions from the networks when their version of the ‘truth’ is there for all to see. Remember those big video screens in ’1984′?

Regardless of the inconsistencies of the President, his administration and, ashamedly, some Republicans, there is a double standard that should annoy every American. It is the use of the United States as the world’s scapegoat. While they are all too happy to enjoy the benefits they reap from America, all the ills of the world seem to be attributed in some way to the US. You’d expect this sort of  propaganda from the…. let’s say non Judeo-Christian countries, to prevent accusations of racism from the left. However, this attitude is prevalent amongst our so-called allies.

Recently, in one of  Skip’s articles, he included a forum post, written by myself, to a British site. One or two of the Brit contributors were, although distinctly left-leaning, reasonable in their approach. Most, however, were totally anti-American and even made remarks such as, “Can’t we get away from you lot?” An interesting statement, coming from one who lives in an island (Guernsey, a British Crown Dependency) whose liberation from occupying nazi forces was in no small part due to the support of the US military. Strangely, they feel a strong bond to the UK, whose government (the recent socialist one, anyway), along with the EU, would have them change their attractive taxation rules as an offshore banking center, a move that would decimate their strong economy.

It’s no good trying to find logic in any of this, most of it stems from purely emotive reactions of one kind or another. Sour grapes on the part of Britain, perhaps, because it could have been what America became, but didn’t? A country which was a world leader in research, technology, invention and industry is now run on service industries and civil servants. It would be interesting to know what the reaction would have been in Britain, if Texaco had caused a spill on the British coast the size of the one in the Gulf created by British Petroleum. No prizes for guessing!

It also gets me wondering what the world would be saying if a North Korean ship had been sunk by an American torpedo. A UN meeting to discuss sanctions? Would China, Russia and various other countries who are strangely silent be so quiet?

Obama proceeded on a false assumption, that by extending a hand of friendship to our enemies, by compromising our American values, he could create a safer world. Wrong, Mr President! They see you as a soft touch, giving them the precious time they need to further their totalitarian aims. They hate America and while some of them find your bowing agreeable, it shows subservience. The look of arrogance that is your hallmark when talking to your American people should be used on the Kim Jong Ils of this world.

As we head towards the mid-term elections, conservative Republican candidates take some advice. Stay strong to your conservative beliefs, be honest to yourself and your electorate, do not be swayed by the media, peers or any other factor that may present itself. I believe that although we are not in the best of times, America can and will remain an example to the rest of the world of what can be achieved by adhering to the principles laid down in the Constitution.

God Bless America.

(Editor Dee is in for Skip today)

Yet again there is a connection between an attempted terrorist attack and Britain. Another ‘home grown’ would-be mass murderer whose plot fortunately went awry. There is precious little good news in the press these days and every item regarding the so-called ‘United’ Kingdom seems to be another nail in the coffin of a once proud, honorable nation.

After World War II Britain was lacking in manpower to rebuild a war-torn country, cities and seaports having been all but decimated by constant bombing raids and assaults by the dreaded nazi V rockets. Many of the male population had been killed or severely injured during the conflict, a factor that drove the government to import labor, principally from the British colonies, later called the Commonwealth.

1948 - The Start Of Large-Scale Immigration To Britain.

Most of these new ‘Britons’ assumed roles essential to the infrastructure of any developed country, transportation being one example. The newcomers were happy to be in a country which, although virtually bankrupt after years of turmoil and still enduring food rationing, was a pretty good place to be after the total poverty that many had known before. Aside from the usual verbal and sometimes physical attacks from a bigoted few, they now had a chance to advance and create a better life for themselves and their children.

So why, then, does it seem that fifty or so years later, a sizable number of immigrants, or their descendants, would like to destroy a culture that afforded them so many opportunities in the past? In a 2007 survey, the results of which were well covered by the media at the time, it was shown that one in eleven of all British-residing moslems agreed that suicide bombing was acceptable. Doesn’t sound a lot, but that equates to about 140,000 people. If it ever really hits the fan, that many ‘fifth columnists’ could do a lot of damage.

The Legendary British 'Bobby' Amid Scenes More Akin To The Third World.

It is hardly surprising that Britain is a magnet to this sort of person. While the government is constantly blathering on about equality for all minority groups and preaches tolerance toward those of other beliefs, those they seek to help are plotting their, and our, destruction. This ‘religion of peace’ is using its mosques to recruit Jihad activists and spread the word that anything that stands in their way, or does not conform to their sense of ‘morality’ must be eliminated.

While the British intelligence agencies and New Scotland Yard’s Anti-Terrorist Unit are doing their utmost to protect the public on both sides of the pond, the weakness of the government and questionable affinities for organizations like Hamas are counter-productive. The Prime Minister, ‘Flash’ Gordon Brown, seems more concerned about saving the world in fifty days from a mythical threat.

Unlike many countries, England still has an official ’state’ religion, Protestantism under the Church of England. Regardless of this, the formation of Sharia civil courts has been given approval in some cities. The Church does not have such a system, its members having to adhere to the laws of the realm, as is only right and proper.

With the inception of Islamic Sharia courts, the pro-Palestinian stance of the government, the unwillingness to prosecute those who verbally threaten its citizens and promote civil unrest, not to mention the immigration bans on Americans and Europeans who warn of the threat of Islamic fundamentalism – I wonder why Britain finds favor with Jihadists? As they used to say on radio quiz shows, answers on a postcard, please!

(Editor Dee is sitting in for Skip today)

While I’m away with family today, I’d like to introduce you to the lady who pulls all the levers and oils the bearings that make this thing work. Doing a daily column is a lot of work and my editor Dee is the one who gets it all done. Here is her guest editorial. Skip.

Living in Britain for a number of years has given me a perspective on current US events that relatively few can claim to possess. Readers of Drudge Report may be familiar with the frequent links to UK news items from quality newspapers such as the ‘Telegraph’ and ‘The Times’ (the latter, incidentally, was originally called ‘The Thunderer’ in its early days – what a wonderful name!), along with some from the ‘knee-jerk’ papers, often called ‘red-tops’ due to their colored header background. According to a recent survey, there has been a huge rise in the number of American online readers accessing and commenting on these British sites.

So why the increased interest in the affairs of Blighty from over the pond? Apart from the obvious connections of friends, family and expats, along with the sometimes strained ‘closest ally’ relationship, I believe there is something deeper – something that could help to save the US.

Socialism and communism (someone once said that “socialism is communism in a hurry”) are newcomers to the American political scene, at least at Congressional and, dare I say it, Presidential level. If you’re not familiar with something, there is a tendency to let it play out and see what happens first. The naïve (and usually younger) voter may be blinded by these Utopian sounding ideas. The more wary amongst us, often older with longer memories, will look further ahead and further afield to examine the effects of socialist policies. British newspapers are a great place to start.

The biggest impact on the individual is the removal of freedoms, many of which form the basis of the US Bill of Rights. Let’s look at the First Amendment to begin with. While it is ‘acceptable’ to criticize the Christian churches or Israel, any public criticism of Islam could find you charged with anything from racism to inciting hatred, amongst various other public disorder offenses. This is in a country that fought valiantly in the twentieth century against the national socialists for the rights of Jews and other minorities, the nazi doctrine sharing much in common with that of jihad.

It was this freedom of expression that managed to get Michael Savage and Geert Wilders banned from the UK. The UK government finally backed down in the case of the latter. Well, it’s pretty difficult to ban someone from an EU country when they have a ‘free movement’ passport. That is, of course, unless the person commits a crime. Wilders’ only crime was speaking his mind, thoughts which the Westminster socialists did not like.

Geert Wilders

This hypocrisy of the left channels down to education, where establishments have been instructed not to liaise with Israeli institutions. Is that any surprise when there are Members of Parliament who openly support terrorist organizations like Hamas? George Galloway was challenged on this point a couple of years ago by talk radio host Rusty Humphries. When the questions got too hot to handle, Galloway called security to remove Humphries from the building. That of course sums up the attitude of a left-wing government – they are NOT answerable to the people.

George Galloway

Of course, control of the media is an important factor to the left (watch out for the fairness doctrine coming down the pike!). The BBC, Auntie Beeb as she has been affectionately known in Britain, has become Nanny Beeb, the official organ of the nanny state. For decades, it was respected for factual coverage of news and current affairs. Its entertainment output was the envy of broadcasters worldwide, high quality period dramas being one of its hallmarks. While the quality of programing has deteriorated and its ‘factual’ programs become ever more left-leaning, the compulsory license fee (tax, basically) increases annually. For $227 a year, you can enjoy programs that espouse the dangers of global warming, the plight of Palestinians (but not the Israelis who were bombarded by their rockets), soap operas that make juvenile drunkenness and drug abuse look acceptable, not to mention children’s entertainment with not-so-hidden political messages.

I saw an episode of Doctor Who, produced by the BBC, on the SyFy channel recently. That’s not a misprint – they changed the name from Sci-Fi for copyright reasons! It involved the Doctor and his equally provincial-English speaking assistant (Oxford English is frowned upon these days, which is probably why people like Stuart Varney took their eloquence to the US) arriving millions of years in the future. When asked by his assistant how the Doctor knew that a building was a hospital, he replied “The green crescent, the universal symbol for a hospital”. Not a red cross, not a Star of David or the snake and staff, but a green crescent. This is only one example.

So what does the British taxpayer get for their hard-earned bucks? Those who decide to work, that is, rather than those who ‘play the system’ for welfare benefits, that can be financially better off than if they were employed. A police force that has no teeth, who might attend a 911 call “within an hour”, which is the standard control center reply. A police department that tells a supermarket manager (of my acquaintance) that their time was being wasted for attending a shoplifting incident. A system of law and order where a person can get incarcerated for a longer period for possessing a weapon in their home for personal defense, than a person who inflicts serious injuries on an innocent member of the public. Considering the fact that Britain is a ‘gun-free’ society, the rising number of shootings in public places is something to worry about. Proves the point that the bad guys will always get guns – leaving the innocent, law-abiding folks defenseless.

I guess it keeps the health service busy, what’s left of it. A gunshot wound would put someone at the front of the line, no mean feat when it can take three weeks to get a doctor’s appointment, a year to see a specialist for a serious shoulder injury (both of these are my personal experiences), eighteen months for cataract surgery, or years for hip surgery. I know a guy who hobbles around at work all day that has been waiting over two years for surgery. I have nothing but praise for the medical professionals that I have personally encountered. They are overworked, underpaid (especially when compared to their US counterparts) and sometimes even physically abused. But they are like the crew of a sinking ship – no matter how good their seafaring skills, if the hull is seriously flawed there is nothing on Earth that will stop it going down! Free health service? Hardly! More and more tax money is being pumped in every year, with nothing to show for it. You’ll see soon enough with Obamacare.

There you have it, folks. A little taste of what is to come in the Socialist States of America. Enjoy what freedoms you have left while you can. Of course it can be reversed, in the US at least. The disease has taken root in Britain and people get used to it, it is all the younger generation have ever known. It would take a major revolution to change British society now and quite frankly there seems to be no-one on the horizon up to the job. The last hope, in the form of the Conservative party, seem more interested in kowtowing to the voter than upholding beliefs – their support of global warming legislation is testimony to that. The name Daniel Hannan springs to mind, maybe there are more like him who put belief before popularity.

YOU, the American citizen, CAN stop this slide towards total government control. The longer you let it slide, the harder it is to pull back. It might sound melodramatic, but if America is lost, all is lost. Rekindle the spirit that said NO to Britain in 1776, but this time aim your protests at the Capitol. Start by sweeping clean Congress in 2010. The choice is simple. Follow the British example, where the people work for the government – or make the government work for the American people. Keep reading those Brit newspapers, it will give you the impetus to avoid making the same mistakes!

I really enjoy reading the work of converts -- people who were formerly on the left but through some epiphany became conservatives. They have the most keen insights into what animates leftist thought, and they also understand the tactics that the left uses to advance their causes. David Horowitz, who edited Ramparts in his youth, is probably the best known.

Janet Daley of the UK Telegraph is another such voice. She has a wonderful column this morning that wraps up the Obama administration's response to the economic crisis, and pairs it with Gordon Brown's leadership.

She notes that while Obama may not meet the textbook definition of a doctrinaire socialist, he meets her own practical definition, one with which Great Britain, particularly in the 15 years before Margaret Thatcher, became all too familiar:

You may quibble at my use of the word "socialist" to describe people who generally present themselves as friends of the free market, and who have repudiated full-scale nationalisation (even of the banks at a moment when that option might have appeared irresistible). So, as someone who spent her formative years on the Left, let me make clear that I am using the word to designate those who accept the primary tenet of Marxist ideology: that the economy can and should be controlled by the state.

Like Krauthammer last week, she calls Obama on the odd, revisionist story he told during his speech to Congress, a statist vision of the causes of economic upheaval:

...he actually seemed to suggest that the present crisis had been caused by America's failure to develop a universal health care system and to attend to the impending environmental disaster of global warming ("we made the wrong choices"), and that by focusing on these matters a way can be found out of the country's economic problems.

Is he quite mad? Does he really believe that the banking crisis and the recession were some kind of divine retribution for the absence of universal health care, and excessive carbon emissions? Or is he suggesting that a practical solution lies in spending money on health care and the development of alternative energy sources?

No, not "quite mad," just clever, in a ham-handed way.

I grew up with the Left and what this looks like to me is a power grab: a seizing of the moment by the forces which always believed in state domination. The Left sees an opening here, first for telling a critical lie about the historical origins of this crisis, which was propelled as much by the Left-liberal determination to spread prosperity through easy credit to the poor, as by the greed of bankers. And then, out of the wreckage, to restructure the economy along the lines that it always wanted, complete with central controls over the pay levels in private financial institutions.

We are being led to believe that public debate should be all about economic mechanics when it should really be about political principle: just how many freedoms do we want to lose while governments pretend that they are the solution?

On the lighter side, another UK voice worth reading is James Delingpole, whose book, Welcome to Obamaland: I Have Seen Your Future and It Doesn't Work!, is a real hoot. Delingpole is no convert, but he understands the Obama attraction well, and has good fun comparing it to the Blair years to let us know what's ahead in the former colonies. It'll make all but most humorless Obama acolytes laugh, too. Among other things, he chronicles the left's campaign to ban fox hunting, "the only sport," he notes,  "FACT - where alcohol actually improves your performance."

Crossposted at Right Minds

Britain is an anti-gun liberal’s dream. It is illegal to own a handgun, with a penalty of five years in prison for unlawful possession. No more than 4% of homes in England contain guns. Those few who are gun owners are subject to draconian gun laws, including laws regarding “safe gun storage,” even though the gun would probably then be inaccessible at short notice. Not that that matters to the British gun authorities—self defense is not considered a legitimate reason to own a firearm. Even imitation guns are banned.

And the British system works—there are very few guns in Britain. The police still go unarmed. Even criminals have trouble finding guns. Gun crime in Britain is far less than in the United States. There is no serious opposition to Britain’s effective ban on all weapons—the pro-gun movement in England is practically nonexistent. British law is the embodiment of every gun control advocates dream.

I read a great many mystery and crime novels, from writers both in the United States and England. And there is a difference in the role guns play in the plots—in the American stories, guns are literally everywhere, and both the police and the villains are heavily armed. In the British books, guns are rarer—the police rarely carry, and even the villains don’t pack near as much heat as there American counterparts.

But the American books are fairly optimistic—the villain usually gets caught (or shot), and even the darkest American mysteries usually have a glimpse of restored order in the conclusion. The British books often lack that optimism—the police spend pages agonizing at their inability to stop crime; the villain often escapes justice; and there is a sense of escalating lawlessness and anarchy. In American crime literature, the system, though flawed, works; in British detective novels, it is utterly broken.

But can you really judge two justice systems by comparing mystery stories? Perhaps not every time, but in this case, such a comparison is right on. British gun control advocates have succeeded in making guns illegal—but they also ensured that the only gun owners are violent criminals. Violent crime has exploded.

According to a November 2002 Reason magazine article (note that these statistics are slightly outdated, but there is no reason to believe that British crime rates have dropped significantly), violent crime is out of control. Britain enacted its handgun ban in 1996, by 2001, crime rates had doubled. By 2002, your chances of being mugged in London were six times higher than in New York City. 53% of burglaries took place while the victims were at home, compared to a mere 13% in the United States. According to the 2003 International Crime Victims Survey, Britain suffered from a crime rate three times that of the United States. By 2002, a UN study stated that England and Wales had the Western world’s worst record of criminal offenses. And British crime rates are artificially low—after the fifth crime against an individual, the government stops counting, which means that an extra two million violent crimes go unrecorded each year.

How do criminals get around Britain’s gun laws? This may come as a shock to liberals, but government is not omniscient. Many guns get through, and every one falls into the hands of violent criminals. And those criminals who can’t get guns just use knives—knife crime is a major problem, accounts for much of Britain’s violent crime. And no, you can’t use a knife for protection in England—carrying knives longer than three inches is a crime.

Gun control has been a total disaster in Great Britain. It is truly mind-boggling that so many liberals want to try it here. No matter how efficient the police force (and our police forces are often underfunded) or functional the prison system (and our prison system is very, very poor), a defenseless citizenry will always remain vulnerable to crime. They have found that fact out in Great Britain—and if the gun control zealots ever get their way, we will find that out in America as well. Crime novels aren’t always a good indicator of a county’s success in fighting crime—but this time they are.

I went to a lot of sites to get infomation for this post, and you can find them here, here, here, and here.