Finally. An authority figure with real-life experience has stated that modern Islamic terrorism has changed the landscape, and the public must participate in their own defense. Liberal professors postulate, and Democrat politicians with security details wring their hands and insist that “safe zones” and “gun-free zones” will keep everyone safe from evil guns that apparently fire themselves.
Former Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble, who previously headed up all law enforcement for the U.S. Treasury Department, had a different take on how the public should respond to terrorism. He made his comments after last month’s deadly al-Shabab attack at the Westgate shopping mall in Nairobi, Kenya, and suggested that the most logical answer might be the arming of civilians.
That undoubtedly will have liberals crying in frustration because it is the opposite of what they want to hear.
Read Noble’s other comments on page 2:
Obviously. The only reason to disarm the populace is to subjugate and abuse them.
Police do an admirable job in a lot of cases, but they can’t be everywhere, and they can’t magically appear instantly. If someone breaks into your home or starts shooting or attacks you, you either have the means to stop them, or you don’t. The police won’t appear instantly in a puff of smoke, and spiderman isn’t going to swoop down and prevent crime.
Yeah we knew this in the 1700s but thanks!
That’s right. But Obama and his Isis don’t want to risk dying. They want no chance of resistance from disarmed sitting ducks.
THAT, IS NOT ONLY THE TRUTH, IT IS OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PROTCGT AND DEFEND OUR RIGHTS, AND OUR LIVES, PERIOD. EVERY PRESIDENT HAS TAKEN A SOLEMN OATH TO PROTECT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION…INCLUDING THE SITTINGPRETENDER IN THE
well at least someone gets it!
Now here’s a man with a brain
Funny, I didn’t see this on cnn or nbc.
Now You’re Talking Sense!
Someone with some since!
I am with him,what you think