Newsletter 2 from the Facebook group “Jamaica crime plan? Let us have GUNS!”
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14034788468

The first reaction to our cause from those who are sceptical of it, uncommitted or against it is always bewilderment that good-meaning individuals propose to do away with violence by promoting violence. Firearms are instruments of violence; it is true. Common sense would suggest that to reduce the violence in our country we should discard all solutions that seem to add to that violence. If lay common sense were the only foundation on which decision-making should be based then we would have no need for higher education. The “common sense solution” can, at times, be the incorrect one or the least efficient. The reason for this is that the “common sense solution” is often determined in the absence of facts. Were common sense employed with all the facts present then one would easily see the correct answer that may have been counterintuitive at first.

Common sense told mankind centuries ago that if one sailed too far beyond the boundaries of the world, one would drop off the face of the Earth. Vestiges of this common sense idea still remain in idiomatic expressions that make reference to the four corners of the world. It seemed to make perfect sense. If you stand on a cliff with a view of the ocean stretching seemingly without limit to the point where heaven and earth converge, you will see only a horizontal line where they meet that we call the horizon. Clearly anybody who told you that the world was more ball-like and not flat with a dome-like heaven must have been off her rockers.

The lesson that we should have learned from our ancestors, who made incorrect inferences about the shape and structure of the Earth, is that all the facts taken together can sometimes reveal truths that defy perception and intuition.

The argument for self-defence which seeks to allow interested citizens to defend themselves with the best tool for protection and preservation of life – the gun – is one that produces emotional responses that emerge independent of factual analysis. These emotional responses neglect to make the distinction between justifiable forms of violence as in using violence to defend oneself and unjustifiable forms of violence. It is not always possible to dissuade an individual who intends to use violence against another with words or reason. The threat of violence and, if required, the act of violence are sometimes the only compelling argument in those situations.

It is around these emotional responses that the ideology of gun control has made its nest. Ideology we must bear in mind is a belief system that is impervious to facts. When the facts run contrary to the belief system then it adapts or distorts so that the facts will never deteriorate the structure that holds the belief system together. Ideology is not concerned with what is – the reality or the status quo. Ideology is concerned with what should be or ideals even if said ideals are demonstrably unattainable.

Gun control is as misleading an ideology as there ever was. Even in its name it toys with the emotions. The term “gun control” is a deceptive euphemism. It is a euphemism that subconsciously tries to assert the principles of the ideology as reasonable. Just on hearing the term gun control, the mind might automatically make these deductions: guns are for killing; killing is bad; therefore, we must control the guns to control the killings. Gun control might be more accurately described for what it is: citizen control.

The people who support gun control – gun control advocates – can be divided into three broad categories which overlap to an extent: hoplophobes; pacifists; and statists. Although their backgrounds and world outlook may be different, they all have the common agenda of wanting to keep law-abiding citizens defenceless.

Hoplophobes are the easiest type to understand. Hoplophobes have a phobia. They are afraid of the tool itself and its potential for destruction. They do not feel comfortable in the presence of a firearm. They do not enjoy the sight of them. In fact, the instruments terrify them irrespective of whether the owners of the instruments are agents of the state, law-abiding citizens or criminals. Hoplophobes believe that the way to deal with their fear is simply to rid the world of the object that causes them distress. As with any phobia, if it becomes debilitating to normal functioning then professional help would be the only recommended recourse for hoplophobes.

Pacifists are the utopians among the gun control advocates. They have espoused a worldview that calls for non-violence even in the face of violence. Extreme pacifists reject the right to life. Faced with imminent violence that would prove fatal, the extreme pacifist sticks firmly to the view that violence is never the solution. Pacifists envision a world in which all human beings live in harmony where violent conflict is non-existent and peaceful verbal discourse is the only way to resolve conflicts. Predators absolutely love pacifists. The predator knows that it is easiest to operate when the prey is unaware of its presence. The pacifists, in rejecting the notion that predators exist, do them a favour. The extreme pacifist’s ideal is akin to burying one’s head in the sand and hoping that danger will disappear.

The statists are the most sinister of the gun control advocates. Unlike their counterparts, these are the gun control advocates who are aware that more guns for law-abiding citizens means fewer murders. They seek to strip law-abiding citizens of their guns or keep them relatively unarmed, even if it results in more murders, because they respect the powers of the state and denigrate the rights of the individual. Not only are armed citizens dangerous to criminals, they are dangerous to an oppressive state. It is not easy to imagine widespread state oppression in a context where the majority of the citizenry is well armed. Abusing well-armed citizens would lead to revolt and mutiny – disquieting prospects for the statist. Yes, an armed citizenry would almost require good governance to keep the citizens content and for the statists who wish to enjoy powers on their terms and not on the terms of the governed, giving the governed ammunition against them is an idea that sends chills up their spines.

The gun control ideology and gun advocacy offer two approaches to the primary concern of Jamaicans – murders. The gun control ideology proposes an after-the-fact approach to dealing with murders. Gun advocacy supports a before-the-fact approach.

Since gun control seeks to make the citizen dependent on the government for protection by preventing law-abiding citizens from defending their own lives when the need arises – a dubious proposition as ample historical evidence exists that governments, at times, resort to abusing defenceless citizens – then the ideology stresses an after-the-fact model. The model works on the premise that there is a victim who has just been murdered. The police arrive on the scene, gather clues, interrogate witnesses, collect forensic evidence, apprehend suspects and place the matter before a court of law. When violent criminals have committed enough murders they will leave behind clues and evidence that will eventually lead to their arrest, prosecution and incarceration. If the plan works, those who remain living after-the-fact are overjoyed that the culprits are behind bars. The dead victims have nothing to say on the matter.

Gun advocacy stresses the before-the-fact model. The premise of this model is that you do not need to die for violent criminals to get justice. In fact, right then and there when you encounter the criminal, you have the possibility to repel, apprehend or eliminate your attacker if you are armed. After surviving the attack, the triumphant citizen can call the police for assistance, file a self-defence report and continue with her life. In the before-the-fact model, the would-be victim lives to tell the tale.

In the gun control ideology we see disfranchisement; the citizen is made dependent. Gun advocacy, conversely, is empowerment. Citizens are made into masters of their fate.

Gun control wants you to die so that murderers can be caught.

Gun advocacy wants you to live so that murderers do not.

Are you willing to die for the gun control ideology?

Facebook group: “Jamaica crime plan? Let us have GUNS!”
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14034788468

Jamaicans seem to want to give the responsibility of saving their own lives to everybody else but themselves. They want the poor mongrel Bruno to protect them. They want the security guards to protect them. They want the police and military to protect them.

They do not want to acquire arms for defence against criminal gunmen because they are afraid that the criminal gunmen will either take them away or punish them severely for having the audacity to want to defend their lives.

I would ask the Jamaican people just what kind of sacrifices are they prepared to make?

Why is it so easy for Jamaicans to give up their liberties? We endure laws that strip the citizens of their ability to defend themselves (with firearms or knives or mace/pepper spray which are also illegal I believe). We put up with curfews, random police searches and detentions, extrajudicial killings (because we trust the judgement of the enforcers who always kill only “bad people”?) , detentions without charges that last for days or months, people being forgotten in the system, police powers for the military.

The coward rationalises that if we give the state even more powers then surely the state will be able to rein in the murders.

Cowards get into a frenzy when they are told that they might have to face the criminals and that they might have to be the ones who will have to save themselves.

How much more of this cowardly inaction can we take?

Look at what deference got you? By not challenging the criminals from early you’ve made them too confident.

The people who are policymakers have the best tools for self-defence AND bodyguards on top of it. They *insist* that you remain unarmed.

I would tell you that the only “inconvenience” that you should be prepared to accept is the inconvenience of having to get out of your comfort zone and learn more about a tool that could save your life, the lives of your loved ones and the lives of strangers who would regard you as a hero or heroine.

Cowards will never achieve peace except the kind that comes with an engraving on a headstone.

Don’t be a coward.

Don’t beg evil for mercy.

Defend your right to life.

Jamaica crime plan? Let us have GUNS!
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14034788468

For your consideration,
The key element missing in all Jamaican crime plans put forward so far:

All Jamaican crime plans will fail until they recognise that the Jamaican citizens (being defenceless prey against criminal men and women who will *never* be stripped of their illegal arms) must be empowered to help in the fight against violent crime. It’s not the job of the police to prevent armed robberies, burglary, home invasions, rapes and murders and, frankly, no reasonable person could call on the 10,000 police and 3,000 soldiers to be instantly available to protect each of the 2.8 million citizens against these things. A criminal in your home can reach you in a few seconds. Could the police reach you faster if you call them? What if you live in a remote area or somewhere isolated? How fast could help arrive? Running away is not always an option. The elderly and people with disabilities, for the most part, simply do not have the option. Running away might also save your skin but it won’t save the loved ones you protect for which you have a responsibility to shelter from harm.

Jamaica has had more than 34 years of experience with gun control and we can say resoundingly that it does not work. The cries of “get those guns” are cries of mass hysteria and shared delusions. The American military and Coast Guard have been unable to prevent most contraband from entering their shores. How can we expect our security forces to prevent all illegal guns from entering our island? For all the hundreds of guns that are recovered by the police each year, there are hundreds more that have not been detected. The criminal gunmen will always have guns. Leaving good people defenceless against violent criminals who have shown their commitment to taking lives is a sin.

To those who would say that Jamaicans are barbarians who cannot be entrusted with guns because they are incapable of resolving their disputes amicably, I would call those people bigots, classists, elitists and possibly even racists. Jamaicans are not an inferior people. If Jamaicans were so hot-headed and incapable of resolving disputes peacefully, we would see the masses hacking each other to death with machetes or any other weapons at their disposal. Jamaicans are not murderers by nature. It is the criminal scum who are in the minority with nationwide notoriety who have given us that false notion. Jamaicans — the majority of which are peace-loving rural folk — condemn violence. Let us not use bigoted arguments to prevent good people from having effective means of self-defence.

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

Jamaica crime plan? Let us have GUNS!
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14034788468

Why do I do this? By encouraging others to become able to defend themselves effectively, I also gain personal security. A defenceless population is an easy target for crime. A population that can defend itself is not.

Points itemised.

1. Self-defence is a right. You have a right to life as declared by the UN Declaration of Human Rights but how can you enforce your right to life if you have no *effective* means to defend it?

2. Guns are inanimate objects. They do not have a mind of their own. They are tools that do the bidding of the person manipulating them. Guns *are* legal in Jamaica and you can receive a permit for the firearms that you own. The problem is that there is still some amount of elitism where issuing of permits is concerned. A person must be considered worthy before the state allows him to have a permit to obtain a firearm.

3. Licensed firearms are practically never used in commiting crimes. All permit holders in Jamaica are required to do a ballistics test before they receive the firearm permit. If they try to use their gun in a crime, the police will immediately know who did it and come to the person’s house and arrest him. It is unlikely that such a licensed firearm holder would commit a crime anyway. To receive a permit, you must not have had a criminal conviction. I.e., law-abiding citizens are just that: law-abiding.

4. Criminals don’t use licensed firearms to commit crimes. Their guns are high-powered weapons smuggled in from all over. It’s already illegal to obtain and carry a gun without a permit but criminals don’t care because they don’t respect laws. Result? They carry guns anyway (without permits) and often turn them on innocents.

5. Criminals prefer unarmed victims. They are so bold in Jamaica because they really do not expect anybody to return fire. This is why one guy can enter a bar and order everybody to get flat and proceed to execute 5 people as happened in Bog Walk in 2007. In Jamaica, there are about 3 guns per 100 persons.

6. Laws that take guns away from law-abiding citizens embolden and help criminals. Or: When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

7. Do you believe that you will ever face a violent situation? Will you or a family member ever be raped? Will you or a loved one ever be mugged? Will somebody try to enter your home? Hoping that it doesn’t happen to you is not a survival solution. If any of these things happened (God forbid), would you think:
a. These men are disobeying laws that prohibit them from carrying firearms
b. I wish the police were here right now
c. I wish I had pepper spray
d. I wish I had a gun

8. Gun control — the act of taking away firearms from law-abiding citizens or making it more difficult for them to obtain — has *never* been demonstrated to lower crime rates anywhere. In fact, gun control has been linked to increases in violent crimes ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyoLuTjguJA ). How strange? No. It’s actually common sense. Law-abiding citizens are just that. They are law-abiding. They don’t plan crimes. They use their guns for self-defence. Criminals get guns anyway you take it. You can’t stop criminals from getting guns as we see by the numerous firearms recovered by the police. If you take away the means of defending themselves from law-abiding citizens then already armed criminals will find it easier to have their way with them.

9. Many people are capable of living in harmony with each other. Psychopaths and other anti-social individuals lack the very things that enable you to cooperate in society. They are intra-species predators who delight in causing others suffering. There is no reforming them and they simply do not understand mercy. Think about the murders of babies, women and the elderly in this country that seem almost never to have a point. Predators are intent on using violence. Will you let them?

10. The state is not your nanny. The police are not under any obligation to risk their lives to save yours. The police carry firearms including fully automatic rifles to defend *their* lives. There are about 13,000 members of the security forces, 10,000 of which are police and 3,000 of which are soldiers. They *cannot* prevent crime from happening to 2.8 million people. Their function is to gather evidence by examining the bodies of victims for clues and possibly use those clues to locate and arrest suspects.

Imagine: You decide to apply for a firearm permit. The government issues you a firearm permit. You purchase a gun and the ballistics test is done on it so that the police can identify your firearm whenever it is used in any kind of shooting. With your new firearm, would you:

a. hold up the nearest business
b. go after your enemies and shoot them
c. remain the law-abiding citizen that you are
d. be even more polite than before since you really want to avoid conflicts of any kind

If you have more questions, please join our group and ask them there.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14034788468

I formed a group on Facebook recently with the aim of discussing the serious murder rate with which Jamaica is afflicted and to encourage people to apply for a firearm permit from the Firearm Licensing Authority (FLA). It does not matter which position you take on the matter, I would like to encourage people to discuss this issue openly in the group. I believe that increasing gun ownership in the island will help to put a dent in crime and empower people which will have a positive spin-off on the justice system. How many people presently are terrified of pressing charges against bad people because they fear that somebody will be sent to extinguish their lives? Here is the original introductory text I wrote for the group:

Jamaica crime plan? Let us have GUNS!

Jamaica — a tiny third world anglophone Caribbean nation — is besieged by criminals who have no reason to fear the unarmed and disarmed populace. Jamaica, at the time of creating this group, is among the top three murderous countries of the world currently at peace.

It is a misconception that countries with a high rate of gun ownership have high murder rates. It simply is not the case. The top 10 countries with high gun ownership rates have low murder rates.

Bringing crime, particularly murder, within acceptable levels in Jamaica is an enormous task that will require improvements in policing, the judiciary, civil service, education, among others. I intend in no way to posit that increasing gun ownership is a panacea.

We are, however, impeded by people who believe that Jamaican people are not responsible enough or mature enough to deal with firearms. The gun ownership figure is low in Jamaica and could be, at the time of writing, no higher than 4 guns per 100 persons.

The Firearm Licensing Authority that exists now is better than what existed before but it still does not mean that it is not a stumbling block preventing us from owning as many firearms as we can afford, as much ammunition as we need, as high a calibre as we desire, for simply the reason that we want firearms without having to justify ownership of the weapons.

Destroy your fear.
Make protection of your life, your business.
The police are not omnipresent.
At some point your own safety must be your own concern too.
You are responsible and you can manage a firearm.
It is okay for a Christian to own guns.

Free men own guns.
Slaves do not.

Jamaica crime plan? Let us have GUNS!