“Uncle Jed, put down thet thar whittlin’ knife! You Boy Scouts – empty your pockets and step away from your nefarious tools of death! And you, there – Leatherman me no Leatherman stuff, you’re obviously carrying a multi-bladed, high capacity assault weapon! Did you say Swiss Army knife?!? So you confess you have a high capacity assault weapon of war?”
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the Mayor of London, England is apparently embarrassed that his supposedly genteel and smugly disarmed metropolis recently exceeded New York City in its murder rate. Edged weapons are currently the thugs’ choice there, so Mayor Sadiq Khan believes a crackdown is in order. He has supposedly declared pocket knives to be “weapons of war,” and ordered the metropolitan police to go to stop-and-frisk to get them off the streets.
This, despite the fact that the mayor had previously denounced stop-and-frisk as a racist and Islamophobic abrogation of civil rights. It seems that hypocrisy is the stock in trade of prohibitionists.
Mayor Khan tweeted, “No excuses: there is never a reason to carry a knife. Anyone who does will be caught, and they will feel the full force of the law.”
I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised. In our own country, the gun prohibition lobby has been calling semiautomatic AR15s “weapons of war” because they superficially resemble true assault rifles, the M16 and M4, which are selective fire and can fire full automatic, a/k/a machine gun mode. That is blatant BS: I know of no nation issuing its troops semiautomatic AR15s.
Perhaps calling pocket knives “weapons of war” is the (il)logical extreme of the prohibitionists’ faulty reasoning.
Talk about “jumping the shark.”
War is another political concoction…
Right on chap.
For sixteen years I have been carrying an M16 knife made by Columbia River Knives. It is ideal for cutting seatbelts, baler twine, and a lot of other items. One might think that the London police have better ways to spend their time than frisking the day away. .
I knew this bloke was barmy when he tossed his hat into the ring to stand for London’s mayor.
Too bad his fellow Londoners were slumbering. Well, then, they’ve hired the lout. Now they’ll have to bear up under him. London of late has been reading a lot like a Dickens tale what with all the seedy street life, crime, “disappearances” and such. Not certain I’d even be keen on visiting there any time soon. And the coppers, instead of working to reduce serious crime they’re busy about arresting a chap forflipping the bird to the cameras as he motors past the roadside cameras that proliferate everywhere.
Don’t know which are the more berko… the government for wanting to nanny in every way and place or the regular bloke on the street who tolerates the insanity.
My nine year old granddaughter has been asking for a knife, a small pocket knife of the Swiss Army variety, for her past two birthdays. We were about to give in (with her parents’ approval) but now realize we are only inciting hatred, violence and bloodshed.
She has always struck us as a sweet, if boisterous, little girl but now we know the truth. She has homicidal tendencies. She, as everyone else, has no conceivable reason for a pocket knife. If she needs to cut the string on a package or whittle a stick she can contact the proper governmental authorities to have an agent come and do it for her.
Thanks for the heads-up. I guess we’ll get her an AR-15 instead.
Well, that’s a denigrative sexist attitude. If she was a boy, she’d be worth an AR-10!
Thing is, we the people need ‘weapons of war’ if we are ever to go toe to toe with the tyranny that our country is slipping into. The Founders would have already done it, while our frogs slowly boil and we tolerate more and more infringement.
Anybody know why 1911s are not weapons of war given the number of wars tbey have been carried in?
That’s probably coming next, Bruce.
And don’t forget the S&W M&P. Military and Police. Must be a war weapon.
But, but, but, they have to _do_ something! The effectiveness is irrelevant, sadly.
To borrow from “Blazing Saddles”: Hizzoner needs to keep his phoney baloney job.
All I’ll say to all this is, the left, the anti are completely unhinged. Common sense is not in the equation anymore. All this by leaders and lawmaker’s that are protected by firearms because their lives matter more than the general public. Truly a shame.
Common sense is not very common. When someone talks about “common-sense gun control,” whose common sense are we talking about? Who gets to define common sense? “Common sense” is a slippery slope, like the word(s) (un)reasonable. For example, the 4th Amendment protects us from unreasonable search and seizure. Who gets to define what’s (un)reasonable?
Which is why I absolutely refuse to use either term. Killary loves both, don’t forget.
BS, Yes, but as they say “coming to a city near you!” If you have a way to defend your self, then you can’t be a slave and that dear friends is the goal.
Roger Bradley,
You are right, but we are already “wage slaves” right now.
The knee jerk decisions are never thought through by the illogical libs who wield great power over the “people” [servants]. Our Bill of Rights were thought through and that is why our nation is the beacon of hope for many abroad. That said, our illogical libs are attempting to follow the same foolish path as those across the pond and I suspect the ideas being PUSHED through and passed as “laws” will be met with great opposition. Suffice to say, the Sleeping Giant is WOKE and WE THE PEOPLE will never surrender our steak knives, swiss army knives or butter knives to the foolish notions of illogical, idiot law makers.
Stay safe.
In the words of my favorite philosopher, Forrest Gump, “Stupid is as stupid does.” Thank God we
live in a nation where we are citizens not subjects.
The intent is the oiutlawing of guns. All of them.
Everything else is just levers and messaging propaganda to the public.
They are at least honest now in their intent, despite usong childrens bodies as part of their propaganda.
Lest anyone out there think that mere citizens have no right to military-grade weaponry, I leave you with this founding-era quote: “Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? … Congress shall have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American … The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People.” – Tench Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788. And if you think that we no longer have a militia, check out 10 U.S. Code § 246 – Militia: composition and classes.
It has become vogue lately for many to say Jesus, the Son of God, was a progressive liberal. This is pretty easily dismissed since we still have rocks.
Surely God would have banned rocks after that nasty incident when Cain attacked Abel if He is a liberal/progressive. No, he banished the perpetrator, not the object used in the evil act.
Luke 22:36
He said to them “But now one who has a money bag should take it, and likewise a sack, and one who does not have a sword should sell his cloak and buy one.”
Many of us here in London never voted for Sadiq Khan but he was foisted on us.
“They will feel the full force of the law” until we have total control. Then and only then will we build the ovens and finish………
Exactly
Are the police free to frisk Muslims too, or would that be a hate crime or profiling?
We’ll wait for an answer on that one. Heck, probably a hate crime to ask the question.
I had a flat tire. Solved the problem by removing all 4 tires from the vehicle. Problem solved – no more flats.
Brillant analogy!
Molon Labe
The left claims that the AR15 is a weapon of war. You already have shown where that is a fallacy. If my memory serves me, when the 2nd Amendment was written, the weapon carried in war was the exact same rifle that the civilian population carried for day to day use.
London Metropolitan Commissioner Cressida Dick comments about the growing problem of “knife crime” in England’s capital city.
http://start.att.net/player/category/news/article/itn_news_portal-cressida_dick_glad_people_talking_about_knife_crim-velephant
Dr. SueUs would be commenting thusly:
We banned rifles and shotguns in ‘88,
What happened then, it was not so great,
So, we banned pistols and wheel guns in ‘97,
We stacked ‘em in piles as high as Heaven,
But, “gun crime” stats they continued to rise,
As flying bullets downed both gals and guys,
Now, “knife crime” is popping up everywhere,
On roads and streets and even town squares,
The term “weapons of war” is just left-wing propaganda. Just like the term “assault weapon”. Cam Edwards, TV Host for the NRA, used to say that the true definition of “assault weapon” is “any firearm that the gun-grabbers want to ban”. The same is true of the term “weapons of war”. It means “any inanimate object that can be used as a weapon and that the Leftists want to ban”.
While the actions of this London Mayor may seem insane to us (non-leftist folks), you must understand that they are not viewed as irrational by the leftists themselves. The leftist worldview holds (a) that all humans are inherently good at their core and (b) therefore, humans only do evil while under the influence of external social or environmental pressures.
When any human engages in violence against another human being, it is a direct challenge to the leftist worldview. No true leftist can accept such a thing, mentally. Therefore, the instinctive reaction of anyone, enslaved to the leftist mode of thought, is to immediately cast about for some external influence to blame for this violence since they are MENTALLY INCAPABLE OF DIRECTLY BLAMING THE HUMAN WHO ACTUALLY INFLICTED THE VIOLENCE.
The standard, classic, knee-jerk leftist reaction is to blame violence upon weapon proliferation. Leftists truly believe that the “weapons (as an extension of the devil) made them do it”. The simplistic solution is equally clear to the leftist mind: PROHIBITION.
Simply get rid of the weapons and you get rid of the violence and you solve the problem. The true leftist really does believe that it is as simple as that.
The UK leftists did their best to get rid of all the firearms. However, they have found that (contrary to their expectations), a peaceful utopia was not the result. They are too arrogant and vain to admit that their ideology was wrong. So, they do the only thing they can do. They go after more and more weapons. After regular firearms, they went after airguns. Now, they are going after knives. Soon, they will go after hammers, screwdrivers, etc.
When they reach the point where rocks, bricks, bottles, fists and feet are the prime weapons used, what will they do then. Ban rocks and bricks? Ban fists?
The prohibition approach is flawed and doomed to failure because it is based upon a false premise. The premise that violence is caused by inanimate objects in mankind’s environment rather than by man himself. All the prohibition approach really does is disarm the population which leaves them ripe for enslavement. To the more sinister side of leftist ideology, that is a worthy goal in itself. So, don’t hold out any hopes that the leftists will “see the light” and “come to their senses”. They won’t ever do that. Their minds are trapped in the left-wing ideological prison. A few leftists, here or there, may break out. Most never will.
TN_MAN,
RIGHT ON!!! Imagine what we would be going through right now if Hillary Clinton was our President. AAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!! I’m going to have nightmares tonight.
The best defense against an edged weapon (AKA knife)
is a Gun. i.e. 1911 with a flamboyant beaver tail.
BTW victims, be sure to pick up your brass.
The best defense against a Euro Liberal American Politician
is an NRA member elected CONGRESSMAN / CONGRESSWOMAN.
When my wife and I visited Scotland several years ago we were quite surprised when told by the local police that not only is the possession of ordinary Pepper Spray illegal for so-called “citizens” there, but if caught, the penalty under law is the same as for being caught with a concealed firearm. Aren’t these policies working out wonderfully? (eye-roll)
I hear they’re planning on banning pens and pencils next to deal with the rise in misspelled words over there.
Mas, I am surprised that you used such a narrow selective sampling of the statistics. I admit that it plays well to our crowd, but over a broader, more representative time period, all 2017 for example, New York had 292 to Londons 130. The fact that the Londoners are doing it with knives is still a very important point. My info is from BBC News, April 4, 2018
OK. I will attempt to think like a businessman. If the Brits are anything like us Yanks, they will go out and buy knives, swords, hammers, cricket bats, medieval maces, umbrellas, canes, compound bows and crossbows.
And during the London riots, the #1 selling item on amazon.co.uk was baseball bats, in a country that does not play baseball.
In the interest of full disclosure, the British were once issued semi-auto L1A1 versions of the venerable FN FAL. I reject the first premise of the argument. Civilians are sovereign and should have actual weapons of war!
Craig S. Andersen,
I agree. Civilians may have to fight a tyrant’s army, so they should be well-armed. I will not attempt to draw the line at which weapons should be allowed, but I will offer the following humorous example, which I intend should make a point about weapons and people.
Imagine a good citizen comes into possession of an atom bomb. He has a room built beneath his basement, lines it with lead, disarms the bomb, and keeps it there beneath a heavy, locked door. Now imagine a bad citizen comes into possession of a hammer. He uses it to smash in the skulls of those around him. So, here we have one citizen who could safely be trusted with an atom bomb, while another citizen can’t be trusted with a hammer.
Like I said, I’m being absurd in order to make the point that we need to fear bad humans, not objects.
The definition of an assault rifle is an intermediate cartridge-firing carbine that was supposed to replace both rifles and submachine guns by combing the features of both into one compact weapon. Take the full-auto from a submachine gun, made possible by the small cartridge, and marry it to a semi-auto capable carbine with more range than a submachine gun. That would be the proper definition, and without full-auto capability it is not an assault rifle, it is a rifle. As Mas wrote, that is what is issued by all armies of the world.
I’ve fired an FAL and an M-14 in full auto. After that, my firm opinion is if a .308 rifle has a selector switch, it needs a bipod too… and the 20 round magazines are a joke.
Ah yes, the AR-15 the latest “killing machine” the hue and cry goes on. “Oh, those are too dangerous, they kill too many people”. As if there were an inanimate object running about among us that violates all our prescribed limits to human desecration and death that we can tolerate before our sensibilities shout out that it’s too many. I offer a comment from another era which in many ways is the yet unspoken rallying cry of those who wish to oppress us.
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms; history shows all conquerors who have allowed the subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall.” Adolf Hitler
Here is a quotation from THE PRINCE which is a book written by Niccolo Machiavelli in about 1513 AD.
“It has never chanced that any new Prince has disarmed his subjects. On the contrary, when he has found them unarmed he has always armed them. For the arms thus provided become yours, those whom you suspected grow faithful, while those who were faithful at the first, continue so, and from your subjects become your partisans. And though all your subjects cannot be armed, yet if those of them whom you arm be treated with marked favour, you can deal more securely with the rest. For the difference which those whom you supply with arms perceive in their treatment, will bind them to you, while the others will excuse you, recognizing that those who incur greater risk and responsibility merit greater rewards. But by disarming, you at once give offence, since you show your subjects that you distrust them, either as doubting their courage, or as doubting their fidelity, each of which imputations begets hatred against you.”
I would note that Machiavelli really understood human nature and his wisdom is as true today as it was five centuries ago. Even back then, Machiavelli understood the difference between subjects and partisans (citizens). He understood that disarming the population begets hatred toward the overlords who presume such action. It is one source of the distrust and hatred of the leftist elites here in America. It will be their undoing in the end if they persist in their firearms prohibition movement. Americans will not meekly submit to such outrage as the British have done. We will not be tame subjects of the leftist overloads.
“I am the punishment of God
if you had not committed great sins
God would not have sent a punishment
like me upon you”……Ghenghis Khan(must be some relation)
And in the 1960s the US government sold millions of 30 caliber carbines to any civilian who wanted one. It’s a souvenir of WW2 and all veterans would like one. Gee whiz, one pull of the trigger one shot. Of course it was sold with a 30 round magazine.
Oh dear.
What is most bizarre about calling semi-auto rifles “weapons of war” is that they are almost the only action type not originally designed for war.
The first successful semi-auto rifles (e.g., the Remington model 8 and the Winchester 1905) were not designed by a government arsenal, but by civilian designers and were sold not to armies but to sportsmen. In photos of old hunting camps, the Remington model 8 was common. It was a generation before any military picked up a semi-auto.
On the hand, bolt guns were first and foremost military arms, as were breach loaders, muskets, and lever guns (i.e., the Henry rifle developed for the Civil War). So if one wants a rifle that was not originally intended to be a weapon of war, get a semi-auto.
Don’t forget, the Model 8 is also a “takedown” design; pop off the forend, unscrew the wing bolt, and the trunnion slides out of the receiver, splitting the rifle into two convenient pieces. They used to sell “map case” style carry bags for them.
Though John Moses designed a bunch of leverguns, most of the pictures of him on a hunt, the rifle he’s holding is a Model 8.
JBM also designed an equivalent takedown shotgun, sold at the Stevens 520. Naturally, if you have one, symmetry demands you have the other as as well…
Here is an interesting fact. One of the most noted hunters of Alaskan Brown Bears was Judge George W. Folta. Hunting was his passion whenever he could spare time from the Bench. Over a period of several decades, he is believed to have bagged approximately 200 brown bears. He bagged his first one in 1914. He was on a bear hunt in 1955 when he passed away from a heart attack.
The Judge’s favorite rifle, during his early hunting years, was a Remington semi-automatic chambered in .35 Remington caliber. After WW II, he switched to a M1 Garand in 30-06. According to his biography, Of Bench and Bears, the Judge always favored semi-automatic rifles for his bear hunting. He felt that firepower was essential for dealing with a brown bear in the brush at close range. The firing rate of bolt-action rifles, and even lever-actions, was just too slow to suit the Judge.
Given that he put down 200 bears and that it was this ticker that got him in the end, it seems likely that the Judge had good reasons for his views.
So much for the ignorant gun-grabbers who say that there is no sporting use for a semi-automatic rifle. Not that one is needed since the 2nd Amendment does not say a single word indicating that “sporting use” is a requirement. It is the gun-grabbers, themselves, who try to sell that manure.
In the USA, “military” has more often than not meant “not so good” compared to the civilian stuff.
Point the Wayback Machine back to 1873. Anyone – even a child, felon, “Indian not taxed”, or person of “previous condition of servitude” could walk into a store and buy an Evans Repeating Rifle. No Form 4473 or background check, either.
The Evans was a lever action, with a helical magazine that held 34 rounds of ammunition. For 1873 that was some serious firepower. For 2018 it ain’t half bad, either.
The US Army, on the other hand, hadn’t quite finished equipping itself with the new model Springfield rifles, converted from muzzle loaders to metallic cartridges. Which had to be fed into the breech by hand, one at a time.
The Army’s current M-4 is a 60 year old platform, and its snipers use militarized Remington 700s and Barretts, both originally designed for the sporting market.
For that matter, all of the pistols the US military has used were originally designed for the civilian market. The Army asked for various added features for what became the 1911, but the 1911 is still the direct descendant of the civlian-market Model 1900.
TRX and Jacob Morgan,
THE TRUTH DOESN’T MATTER WHEN WE ARE TRYING TO BUILD OUR LIBERAL UTOPIA! The future of America includes moonbeams, rainbows, unicorns and star dust. It does not include those icky,icky guns. You will see how beautiful everything will be when you simpletons get out of the way and let us brainiacs help you and our whole planet!
Comments are closed.