Guns Don’t Kill People, Gun-Free Zones Kill People

Those signs at the Naval reserve center and the armed forces recruitment station are the greatest outrage of the Chattanooga jihad story. Or rather, they should be, but — given the universal government and media devotion to “gun-free zones” — they won’t receive enough attention to dial up public opinion to the point of outrage.

The clearest photo of one of the signs was from the location where the Marines were killed:

Despite the distortion caused by the fracture lines in the bullet-riddled glass, the image is of high enough resolution that the text is quite readable:

The photos from the recruiting station are not as clear, but the “firearms prohibited” sign is visible and obvious:

The two questions that military leaders and federal government officials should be asking themselves are:

How many lives have been saved by our federal gun-free zones policy?

And then:

How many lives have been lost due to the same policy?

But those questions will never be asked, much less answered. The Powers That Be are totally committed to the “narrative” about gun control, and no evidence will change their minds. That’s their story, and they’re sticking to it. The Marine corpses may pile up as high as the Iwo Jima Memorial, but those Marines will never be allowed the same Second Amendment rights that their civilian neighbors enjoy. And nobody else on those federal premises will be allowed to pack heat to protect the facility from armed attackers.

Imagine for a moment that your name is Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez. You’re a good Muslim, from a normal Muslim family, a poster boy for the successful weaving of Muslims into the great rainbow fabric of American multicultural diversity.

And then you happen to read some extremist literature in the bookstore down at the local mosque. After that you get radicalized further on the Internet. Then, during a vacation trip to a holiday resort in Yemen, you happen to run into a radical imam who turns you into a full-blown extremist.

After you get back to Tennessee, you decide it’s time to commit some workplace violence. But to do the job properly, you need some heavy-duty weaponry, and you can’t get what you need legally. But that’s no problem — you talk to a couple of big-bearded guys you met at the mosque, and they put you in touch with a shady gun dealer, the kind who doesn’t worry about federal laws or background checks. Before you can say “Osama bin Laden”, you’ve got the arsenal you need.

Now it’s down to the Army recruiting center to ventilate a few of those uniformed boys. You pull up in front of the place, raise the AK-47… and see a sign on the door that reads: Federal Installation — Firearms are prohibited in this facility.

Aw, shucks! Now what?

You throw the AK into the backseat and burn rubber getting out of there. It’s a bitter disappointment — but someday, somewhere, you’ll find a place where guns are allowed. That’s when you’ll spray bullets at a roomful helpless kuffar to your heart’s content. Yessiree!

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

Yep, that’s the way it would happen.

What other outcome is possible?

27 thoughts on “Guns Don’t Kill People, Gun-Free Zones Kill People

  1. “If the law supposes that,” said Mr. Bumble,… “the law is a ass—a idiot. If that’s the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is that his eye may be opened by experience—by experience.”

    — Charles Dickens, Oliver Twist

    Well, he’s got the experience now — but he had it after Fort Hood as well. That eye will stay shut, so the prudent will walk heavy and watch their six.

  2. It is appallingly inadequate that a military base on “higher alert” has no armed personnel at the gate, and must rely on civilian police. This is real Mad Hatter’s Tea Party stuff.

    • You took the words right out of my brain.

      Exactly: Mad Hatter and madder than a March Hare. A *military installation,* for God’s sake, not allowing personnel to be armed? Those are the very people who would be the best shots! as we found out at Fort Hood, when none of them could shoot back…but the “psychiatrist” found his target multiple times.

      • In the early 1980’s Lebanon Ron had the same brilliant idea. The Muslims immediately excepted his invitation. Many Marines died. Ron withdrew immediately. Learning from scratch, Barak’s barracks with no guns wink and a nod to his beloved jehad community was an invitation to opportunity for instant Muslim gratification. Ban the Imams, the Koran, close the mosques, Islam is a blood thirsty ideology that is about as opposite to God or good as can be.

    • The raised security at larger installations didn’t apply to recruitment centers or armories, or reserve operations. How odd indeed, that those with no M.P’s were left dangling in the breeze. It seems the “soft targets’ were left to be Halal markets for Jihadis.

  3. I wouldn’t join the military today. It is totally PC [excremental material]. You can’t defend yourself against the [Epithets]. In fact they are a favored class. It is insane and my president approves. I hate what is happening to my country.

    US Army 1966-1970

      • I actually heard someone on CBS Radio yesterday, when the assailant had just been identified, refer to–yes!–“Islamic terrorism.”

        But I haven’t heard it again; it was just the once.

      • Strange how many perpetrators of such workplace violence bear the name of the islamic ‘prophet’.

        You’d think there was a connection there … or something.

  4. The “gun free zone” concept is based on the Moralistic Fallacy:

    The other false assumption that it’s based on is the idea that firearms are just a safety hazard and serve no useful purpose. This notion is also supported by the moralistic fallacy as it is assumed that there is never any valid moral reason to shoot anyone, so therefore anyone with a firearm is either inherently evil or dangerously irresponsible.

    Usually the argument is that firearm possession is only evil and irresponsible only if you’re a civilian, yet it seems that this is now extended even to people in the military and the police.

    This absurdity is only maintained by extreme reality-denying bigotry, which from a psychological perspective is exactly the same as a degenerate, irrational, and extreme religious belief.

  5. Madness does not creep up on a people all of a sudden, nor is Reality’s repeated rebuke a deterrent to such madness that has burrowed into a people’s soul. Let us recall the Iran-sponsored lethal jihad on US Marines’ barracks in 1983 , long before Muzoshrink US Army officers spouting jihadist lines for years had armed access to an entire, disarmed army base. In the earlier cases, in Beirut, Marine gate sentries–Marine Sentries! In Beirut! — were proscribed by their “Rules of Engagement” from having bullets in their rifles. Furthermore, if I recall, until 1993 US military officers and Noncoms were allowed to carry sidearms; Slick Willie did away with that.

    • We seem to start from scratch with each new appointment. With so many Muslims on board now and millions more pouring in to defy the old infidel order, this is some serious business opportunity those investing or invested in barbed wire PC works.

      • No, it’s getting worse with each new preznit. Each one seems to be worse than their predecessor. With Hillary or Jeb waiting to take charge, it will become a nightmare for our men in uniform.

        You can rest assured those recruiting stations and reserve bases in blue states will continue to remain at risk. The Dems will do nothing to fix it once the current focus on terrorism dies down.

        When Gen Ordinero came out and effectively condemned the issuing of side-arms to recruiters and reserve base personnel, it’s clear, the political caste is happy the way things are.

        One day soon we will get a public beheading of a soldier here in the states. Perhaps more than one.

        Because the Muslims are watching us, they see how fearful we are, even in protecting our soldiers. We’d rather let them die than give them a fighting chance. This will only incite further attacks.

        That you can take to the bank.

        • Clearly and surely. I hope the generals are meeting somewhere without the industrialists present.

  6. In the Quranic Concept of War, Malik emphasized the importance of laying the groundwork for successful military operations. He explained this preparatory stage as a “dislocation of faith” in the target nation’s sense of security and in the capability of its leaders to defend its territory. The inability of the target population’s leadership to protect its citizens in the face of a terror campaign signals the beginning of kinetic operations in earnest. At some point, dawah transitions to jihad.

    Coughlin, Stephen (2015-05-04). Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad (Kindle Locations 3336-3339). Center for Security Policy Press. Kindle Edition.

    Both Islamic doctrine and Marxist doctrine involve the dissolution of the society they are trying to replace with a revolutionary (or sharia) government.

    The systematic attack on the security of a society will not be carried out by the army or police, generally, because they are too vested in the existing society. So, the physical attacks will be carried out by criminals or street gangs. These entities do not have the resources or organization of a state, and therefore can be resisted quite successfully by an armed, organized citizenry with a stake in maintaining their homes and neighborhoods.

    Hence, the leftists and the Islamists both will push for gun control under the guise of lowering crime. But, the real motivation is to pave the way for armed gangs and criminals to attack citizens at will, sapping their confidence in the existing government.

    “At a Capitol Hill press conference at the end of January, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) joined more than 45 faith leaders from various religious groups in petitioning legislators to pass a statutory solution for gun violence, including a ban on “assault” weapons. The move was organized by “Faiths United to Prevent Gun Violence” and motivated by the recent shooting in Newtown, Connecticut.”

    Very interestingly, the last article was by a Muslim who opposed the efforts of ISNA, or any organization, to implement gun control.

    But, in my opinion, ISNA as a Muslim Brotherhood front, supports gun control because it looks to the time when the Muslim subversion of US government and agencies, and the infiltration of many Muslims, will bring about an Islamic government when the population feels itself at a crisis point due to random physical attacks.

  7. Just a small note, that door is where two military personnel were wounded.

    Nevertheless, it would be safe to assume that the Marine training area where 4 Marines were murdered had a similar sign on every dern building in the complex.

    I have a friend who did 18 years in the regular Army and now, 4 as a reserve officer stationed in a New England state, who wrote to yesterday on FB that all military bases are ” WE ARE UNARMED.. come on in and GET us”… zones.

    He says that is how they feel in the military about the so called gun free zones.

  8. General Ordinero has come out against arming military personnel – his reasoning? They are basically incompetent with weapons.

    Maybe he ought to give up his armed bodyguards and disarm the rent-a-cops at the Pentagon.

    It’s evident that the military brass don’t care if their soldiers are butchered. As long as they have their own armed security teams, that’s all that matters.

  9. If you have a policy such as that then in a country where it’s common to have a firearm you should enforce this policy with metal detectors and armed guards. Otherwise it’s just a stupid writing on the wall.
    For example in Israel each shopping mall has a guard with a metal detector who screens you before you come inside. Why there are no guards in schools authorized to do just that still baffles me, after all the horrible cases.

  10. In the 80s , 6 men armed with AK47s entered a multi-racial church in South Africa and gunned down many people . One of the congregation never moved unarmed , even while attending church , drew his weapon and opened fire . The cowards with the 47s fled immediately . Many more would have died had it not been for him , so the question about carrying guns is not even debatable .
    Disarm the citizens and it becomes a playground for murderers . South Africa is a prime example . Welcome to the killing fields .

  11. The Muslims have our number – so to speak. The more violent and traitorous they blatantly act out the more ‘tolerant’ and compliant we become. A winning formula – for who?

    • It always comes back to that question. Are our leaders really this stupid or is there some grand nefarious plan?

  12. The UK has excessive firearms controls. There may be less shootings here due to that linkage or already present cultural inhibitors. But possession of a firearm for self defence has nothing to do with either argument. A person has a right to defend themselves. Even with its lower gun crime rates in the UK there is still enough threat to justify normal citizens having a firearm. This is without considering the high likelihood of a “Mumbai” style attack on a soft target, densely populated public area.

    • Not too obvious is it. What do these sold out politicians hope to do with all the cash? Have we been defeated or have the gloves even come off yet?

Comments are closed.