By Seth Richardson
For more than twenty-five years now, both as a police officer and civilian, I’ve carried a concealed handgun against the remote chance that I’ll be called upon to use it to defend the innocent. Doing so on a daily basis is a nuisance and a pain in the butt, literally, but it’s a habit I’ve formed and a grave responsibility I’m proud to accept. Carrying a firearm in public requires careful attention and constant training to remain proficient and safe, but it’s a necessary component of securing our liberty as a nation and our individual freedom and safety.
Aside from the obvious reasons related to self-defense against criminals, two terrorist suspects in Seattle illuminated yet another reason why we as a nation need to take our duty to be armed more seriously, as the citizens of Israel do.
In Israel, it’s perfectly commonplace to see citizens carrying fully-automatic weapons like the famous Uzi submachine gun and other military arms openly in public. As a result of this public policy of an armed and prepared citizenry, Israel has not suffered a major terrorist attack on a school in many years. Parents and volunteers armed with military weapons routinely guard Israeli schools.
And contrary to the hysterical maunderings of hoplophobes and anti-gun zealots, Israelis aren’t gunning one another down randomly in the streets, and the gutters remain tidy and free of blood…except when some terrorist sets off a concealed bomb, which is the weapon of choice for cowards.
If Israel’s example is not sufficient, last week, federal agents arrested Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif, AKA Joseph Anthony Davis and another unidentified man in Seattle as they took possession of illegal machine guns provided for them by federal agents in a sting operation. Abdul-Latif, a former sailor in the U.S. Navy, and his cohorts were planning to attack a Seattle military recruiting station to kill as many people as possible. Agents also recorded conversations between Abdul-Latif and an informant where Abdul-Latif lauded the massacre in 2009 at Fort Hood, Texas, where 13 soldiers died and many more were wounded by a traitorous Muslim terrorist mole in our military. The U.S. Attorney’s office in Seattle also released court documents that quoted Abdul-Latif as saying, “It’s a confined space, not a lot of people carrying weapons, and we’d have an advantage.”
Those chilling words vindicate every inconvenience and personal sacrifice I’ve ever made in choosing to be armed in public.
The lesson here is that that no one can defend your life against such sudden attacks but you. The police won’t be there in time and you won’t have six minutes to wait for them to show up. You won’t have sixty seconds. If you’re lucky, you might have six seconds or less to take action to put a stop to the attack and save many lives.
But like the victims at Fort Hood and Virginia Tech and every other mass shooting in U.S. history, the potential victims in this foiled plot, who were disarmed and denied their right to keep and bear arms by their own government, would have been at the mercy of the only people in the room with a gun; the terrorists.
And that’s exactly why terrorists and deranged killers deliberately and carefully seek out “gun-free zones” like colleges and schools and, paradoxically, domestic military bases, where soldiers are denied their right to keep and bear arms except when they are going into combat.
It should be obvious that the fewer “gun-free zones” we allow, and the more law abiding citizens who step up and accept the burden of being armed in defense of themselves, their families and their nation, the fewer targets armed terrorists will have to choose from to ply their trade with impunity, and the greater the chances that when terrorists do attack, and they will, they will not murder innocents unopposed.
© 2011 Altnews