|
Yachtie -> Interpol (10/22/2013 1:36:17 PM)
|
An interesting perspective from the honcho at Interpol -
Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble said today the U.S. and the rest of the democratic world is at a security crossroads in the wake of last month's deadly al-Shabab attack at a shopping mall in Nairobi, Kenya – and suggested an answer could be in arming civilians.
In an exclusive interview with ABC News, Noble said there are really only two choices for protecting open societies from attacks like the one on Westgate mall where so-called "soft targets" are hit: either create secure perimeters around the locations or allow civilians to carry their own guns to protect themselves.
"Societies have to think about how they're going to approach the problem," Noble said. "One is to say we want an armed citizenry; you can see the reason for that. Another is to say the enclaves are so secure that in order to get into the soft target you're going to have to pass through extraordinary security."
Interesting that he also specifies open societies. Perhaps there are those who'd prefer the heavy hand of a closed society. One thing we never hear about is crime statistics inside North Korea.
Then there's always "Citizen-X," that famous case from inside crime free, so the State would say, old Soviet Union.
"How do you protect soft targets? That's really the challenge. You can't have armed police forces everywhere," he told reporters.
Businesses could hire TSA, and people pay a fee, or higher prices, either way, no matter, to be felt up before getting into mom and pop shops. A win-win for some.
In the interview with ABC News, Noble was more blunt and directed his comments to his home country.
"Ask yourself: If that was Denver, Col., if that was Texas, would those guys have been able to spend hours, days, shooting people randomly?" Noble said, referring to states with pro-gun traditions. "What I'm saying is it makes police around the world question their views on gun control. It makes citizens question their views on gun control. You have to ask yourself, 'Is an armed citizenry more necessary now than it was in the past with an evolving threat of terrorism?' This is something that has to be discussed."
Actually, yes. Not that anyone needs hours or days. Unarmed targets are what's needed. That's what they had.
"For me it's a profound question," he continued. "People are quick to say 'gun control, people shouldn't be armed,' etc., etc. I think they have to ask themselves: 'Where would you have wanted to be? In a city where there was gun control and no citizens armed if you're in a Westgate mall, or in a place like Denver or Texas?'"
Can't say I disagree. But he'd find himself argued to death by many here in this forum.
|
|
|
|
