The Second Amendment as a Defense Policy in the United States.

[Sam_Stone]

Sam, specifically on the role of an armed citizenry protecting the US in a terror war: I’ll go with you on armed air marshals preventing things like the 9-11 attacks; but armed citizenry in general? How?

By being where the terrorist is. Let’s say 1 in 10 people are armed. That means in any group of say, 50 people there is a 40% chance that someone in that group will be armed. Now, if someone opens fire with a gun, or tries to crash a barricade, or set off a bomb, someone may be there to stop them.

This is not just speculation. The police in Israel actively promote gun carrying by citizens as a means of deterring or minimizing terrorist attacks. In fact, Israel issued 60,000 new permits to Israelis just last year.

From the article:

Armed civilians have played a significant role in bringing down terrorists during the Palestinian uprising, most recently during an attack this week by a Palestinian gunman at a Tel Aviv restaurant where a wedding party was under way.
A 46-year-old civilian packing a pistol fatally shot the terrorist at close range after three persons had been killed and he had been wounded. When a radio reporter asked the man whether he was a member of the security forces, he said he was a shoe salesman.

According to This cite:

“There’s no question that weapons in the hands of the public have prevented acts of terror or stopped them while they were in progress,” (Israeli Police Inspector) Aharonisky says.

Examples this year:

A woman shot a terrorist twice in the head before he could set off a bomb in a supermarket.
A man at a disco shot to death a Palestinian who had started firing a machine gun.
A private security guard saved hundreds by shooting a terrorist before he could drive his car bomb into a disco.
A grocer fatally shot a terrorist armed with grenades, “explosive devices” and a machine gun.

Here are some other episodes of defensive shooting by Israelis:

In 1994 two Israelis arrived with a garbage truck at the Ovda dump in the Yatir region. A young man approached one of them, stabbed him and ran away. The assailant was shot, wounded, and later captured in hospital in Hebron were he admitted to committing the stabbing.

Also in 1994 a civil administrator shot a terrorist who was shooting at Israelis.

The thing that makes a democracy hard to defend against terrorists is its openness. There are relatively few police, and an uncontrolled population. That means you can NOT depend on the police to protect you against terrorists. The police are a deterrant because they solve crimes and arrest criminals, not because they are expected to thwart crimes in progress. This means the police aren’t much help in cases where the perpetrator doesn’t care about being caught, and plans to die in the attack.

But terrorists do their work in crowds. That’s why they are terrorists. They don’t break into empty factories - they crash vehicles into Discos, open fire in crowded malls, etc. If you do the math, you find that having even a small percentage of the public armed would be a big advantage.

Again, let’s say only 1 person in 20 goes armed, and a terrorist tries to set off a bomb on a street with 500 people on it. There is a better than 70% chance that someone there will be armed, and have a chance to fight back.

I’ve been ranting about this for a while. We will never be serious about terrorism until we start enlisting the citizenry. As long as the government maintains this attitude that we should just ignore what’s going on and go shopping while they try to take care of us, our anti-terrorism defense will be a joke.

How about creating a new federal concealed carry law, that would allow people to arm themselves at all times? The law can be extremely regulated and have some serious requirements - no criminal record allowed, completion of a heavy-duty training course, registration of the weapon, etc. But make it available to everyone who wants to go through the hassle.

For aircraft, how about a new ‘citizen air marshal’ license? No guns allowed, but people can go through a training course in how to subdue someone, immobilize them, and apply non-lethal restraint devices. On each airplane, there would be a locker with defensive gear in it - primarily elbow-length leather gloves and vests to protect against the most likely weapon, which is a knife or other cutting instrument. There would also be zip-tie handcuffs, etc. Things that are useless to terrorists, but invaluable to unarmed people who try to prevent them from reaching the cockpit.

Anyway, if someone has a citizen air marshall license, they could indicate that when they board. They would then be seated up front near the cockpit and near the front defensive gear, and near the exits. And give them some added training in how to use the egress gear in an airplane, and some first aid. That way they’re useful near the exits even in a case of an accidental crash.

The government doesn’t have to pay a nickel for any of this. Let the private market come up with the courses and certifications. All the government has to do is issue the guidelines and equip the planes.

Then, we can stop confiscating bloody nail clippers and pocket knives, which would allow baggage screeners to focus their efforts on finding guns and explosives. And, we could move people through faster, and reduce the stress on the airline industry.

And the other important thing all this would do is allow the people to contribute. Let them take courses, and take charge of their lives. Let them feel more secure. For many people the worst part of terrorism is that you feel helpless.

There are many other things citizens could do. Set up volunteer programs to do defense drills. Offer tax breaks for first aid training.

It annoys me to no end that the strength of our culture resides in its freedom, but as soon as the going gets tough the government’s solution is always to restrict that freedom. Why not leverage our strengths? Find a way to make freedom work for you instead of being a liability. And to do that, you need to get the citizenry involved. Ham Radio operators have been enlisted in a similar fashion for decades, and they offer a real value to the public in disaster relief and other emergency services.

All volutary. Let people do it for their own reasons, just like IPSCC pistol shooters learn combat shooting for their own reasons. Offer the certificates, maybe some tax breaks on tuitions and license fees, and some incentives like a category of citizen awards for extraordinary service, valor, whatever.

There are a lot of people out there who would jump at the opportunity to get involved at that level. I would. I’m not talking about organized service - just an incentive to get people to improve themselves. Think of merit badges or swimming medals as the best analogy. And how many of us got bronze medallions in swimming? Lots. Or the various Red Cross lifesaving courses?

[Spiny_Norman]

Susanann:

I am told that Paris was taken in ww2 without a shot being fired.

Just in the name of fighting ignorance: Someone lied to you. Check your sources.

As for the well-regulated militia as a serious invasion defence - that was more of a feasible concept when the US constitution was drafted than it is now. The gap in fighting power (that’s not just firepower) between the hastily organized armed civilians and the professional fighting men has widened considerably since then.

[Susanann]

Originally posted by Spiny Norman *
**** “--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am told that Paris was taken in ww2 without a shot being fired.” Susanann*:
Just in the name of fighting ignorance: Someone lied to you. Check your sources.

As for the well-regulated militia as a serious invasion defence - that was more of a feasible concept when the US constitution was drafted than it is now. The gap in fighting power (that’s not just firepower) between the hastily organized armed civilians and the professional fighting men has widened considerably since then. **

1. Read any history book. The 6th German Army marched into the French capital of Paris, on June 14, 1940 without any resistance, and French General Frere (French 7th Army) left Paris without firing any shots at the invading Germans.

Compare how the weak French who not resist the Germans at all in Paris, (and little elsewhere) with the determinatin of the Soviets, who never gave up Moscow, and who defended it to the last, until they were able to totally defeat the Germans. The Soviets never surrendered and fought on no matter what their losses were.

2. The gap in fighting power and fire power of American civilians and the american military is a very recent phenomena.

Except in time of war, the U.S. military was kept very small until recently. Most of the time, the armed American citizenry had vastly more fighting power over the very small standing army in America thoughout most of our country’s history.

Americans could own any weapon concievable until 1934 when sawed off shotguns and machine guns were outlawed. It was not until 1968 that other weapons such as mortars, bazookas, etc were outlawed(heavily regulated).

Early presidents, such as Madison and Jefferson pleaded with private citizens who privately owned battle ships(the most powerful weapon in the world at that time), to help out the american army in time of need.

Even my own family owned repeating rifles and revolvers long before the U.S. Army issued them to our troops.

A U.S. soldier was not commonly issued a machine gun in the early 1900’s, but any private citizen could own one and carry one if he so chose until 1934.

[GusNSpot]

Well, that bit about, “And be willing to use the weapons.” is the rub IMO.

Today, the % of people who are willing to fight for their personal freedom is down in a significant way. Just look at the , “It has to be some one else’s fault.” attitude that is so prevalent today. We pass laws to prevent people from helping each other, we make it profitable to go after ANYBODY who tries to help and so now most folks really are fearful of doing anything. We fear each other far more that we do an outside threat.
There are those who have so talked themselves into positions that they can not fight and can only stand and whimper about it not being “My fault” and I can’t / won’t “do anything.”

I have no answer for what ails us as a country, but lack of tolerance and lack of concern for out fellow man has brought us to the point that I think some of our younger folks will live to see the day they gave the world to the bullies and it will be too late. YMMV :smack:

[Spiny_Norman]

Susanann, I’m afraid I misread you as saying that the German campaign in France met with no resistance at all.

Paris did indeed surrender (“open city” IIRC) after the French Army had been fought to the point where it couldn’t offer organized resistance.

Would house-to-house fighting in Paris have made a load of difference ? It’s not as if there was any sort of hope of reinforcements arriving from somewhere. And the idea of going out in a blaze of glory did not appeal to a population that was still gutted from 1914-18.

Compare how the weak French who not resist the Germans at all in Paris, (and little elsewhere) with the determinatin of the Soviets who never gave up Moscow, and who defended it to the last, until they were able to totally defeat the Germans.

Ehm - surely there might have been just a few other differences involved ? The basic size of the two countries, for starters? I’m sure the French general staff would’ve relished the opportunity of a strategic withdrawal/scorched earth, an adverse climate to blunt the teeth of the opposing army, roads that turned unusable, the option of moving heavy industry east of the Urals etc. etc.

Most of all, they probably would have appreciated an opportunity not to be among the first to be on the receiving end of a blitzkrieg campaign. They didn’t see it coming, but then again, very few armies at the time did.

The gap in fighting power and fire power of American civilians and the american military is a very recent phenomena

• but it’s a reality, nonetheless.

Fighting power is not just a matter of marksmanship, caliber and cyclic fire rate, it’s a matter of communication, organization, procedure, support, replenishment, getting intelligence up the line and orders down. 10.000 men with rifles, however good, wouldn’t make up a rifle division back in WWII and they certainly won’t today.

Even entirely ignoring the heavy paraphernalia of modern warfare (armour, artillery etc.), the basic “citizen with rifle” militia group will have a hard time fighting the basic infantry platoon - the difference in training levels and drilled procedures makes it an uphill battle.

With the heavy stuff on the invader’s side, it gets even more uneven. The militia will be able to delay and to inflict losses,and they will incur their own losses in doing so. They’ll rarely be able to hold, let alone take, an objective. After a while, fighting on will be a really hard sell.