Interpol: allowing citizens to carry guns in public is most effective way to prevent terror attacks

[lostinblue 1,989]

Interpol: allowing citizens to carry guns in public is most effective way to prevent terror attacks

How long would the jihadis at Charlie Hebdo, Westgate, Mumbai – and many other terror attacks to come – be able to continue killing if they were surrounded by armed citizens? Interpol states that the only way to stop such attacks is to allow citizens to carry arms (the only alternative to an armed citizenry is “extraordinary security” surrounding every area where many people meet – train stations, super markets, schools, etc. – which is of course completely unrealistic). If guns are illegal, only violent criminals, fanatic jihadis and our over-worked, understaffed police will have them.

In case you are unsure whether it is a good idea that citizens legally own firearms: Switzerland has very liberal gun laws and one of the lowest percentages of homicide in the world. Interesting statistics on guns, homicides and firearm related accidents in the US here.

From abcNEWS:

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.” …

Citing a recent call for al Qaeda “brothers to strike soft targets, to do it in small groups,” Noble said law enforcement is now facing a daunting task.

“How do you protect soft targets? That’s really the challenge. You can’t have armed police forces everywhere,” he told reporters. “It’s Interpol’s view that one way you protect soft targets is you make it more difficult for terrorist to move internationally. So what we’re trying to do is to establish a way for countries … to screen passports, which are a terrorist’s best friend, try to limit terrorists moving from country to country. And also, that we’re able to share more info about suspected terrorists.”

In the interview with ABC News, Noble was more blunt and directed his comments to his home country.

“Ask yourself: If that (Westgate terror attack) 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.'”

http://10news.dk/?p=760

[Expat1 971]

We should supply guns, ammo, trucks, Humvees, and shoulder-fired missiles to everyone - like we did in Iraq.

That way, everyone is safer and we only have to go back in and bomb half of our own stuff instead of supplying one side and having to bomb it all.

[Dakine10 5,452]

Interpol: allowing citizens to carry guns in public is most effective way to prevent terror attacks

The most effective way would be to build a giant wall around the country. It should be multi layer, with at least one layer made of lead and with a roof made of blast resistant glass. Every citizen should have a bunker and a security chip implanted and all non citizens should be deported.

Giant robots should be deployed at all designated soft targets. The robots should be semi autonomous, but not smart enough to take over like Skynet did. In case that does happen though, there should be backup robots and backup walls. Mexico will pay for all this, under threat of giant robot attack.

That's the most effective way.

[Darnell 8,479]

Nairobi Mall Attack was the impetus for this Interpol fella to write? And that was not this year?

Cool. I am sad, no one took him seriously then, and now its turned into an 'I told you so' moment..

[lostinblue 1,989]

Nairobi Mall Attack was the impetus for this Interpol fella to write? And that was not this year?

Cool. I am sad, no one took him seriously then, and now its turned into an 'I told you so' moment..

All over the world ... told you so moments

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

This you tube is safe for most people to watch . .. No blood and guts . A concealed carry owner with resolve could have taken this fellow out .several times during this episode

[Dakine10 5,452]

Nairobi Mall Attack was the impetus for this Interpol fella to write? And that was not this year?

Cool. I am sad, no one took him seriously then, and now its turned into an 'I told you so' moment..

He made a case for private citizen to carry or for enhanced security at soft targets.

We already know that Kenya does allow private ownership of firearms and any one who owns one can CC without an additional permit. However we also know the guy who intervened at the mall attack was security from a nearby firm, an ex British marine wearing full body armor.

Based on what happened, he's making a better case for armed security than armed citizenry. I would think each individual country would want to weigh that against the actual risk of a terrorist attack happening.

[Rob L 3,811]

The most effective way would be to build a giant wall around the country. It should be multi layer, with at least one layer made of lead and with a roof made of blast resistant glass. Every citizen should have a bunker and a security chip implanted and all non citizens should be deported.

Giant robots should be deployed at all designated soft targets. The robots should be semi autonomous, but not smart enough to take over like Skynet did. In case that does happen though, there should be backup robots and backup walls. Mexico will pay for all this, under threat of giant robot attack.

That's the most effective way.

[Darnell 8,479]

He made a case for private citizen to carry or for enhanced security at soft targets.

We already know that Kenya does allow private ownership of firearms and any one who owns one can CC without an additional permit. However we also know the guy who intervened at the mall attack was security from a nearby firm, an ex British marine wearing full body armor.

Based on what happened, he's making a better case for armed security than armed citizenry. I would think each individual country would want to weigh that against the actual risk of a terrorist attack happening.

Ya, i get all of that,

But from a TIMELINE perspective, sidereal motion included, the fellas posit was mostly ignored.

[Rob L 3,811]

This approach makes perfect sense:

In the case of Paris, it is reasonable to assume at least some lives could have been saved if folks had been armed.

Problem Solved.

And in the case of snipers, planted bombs, car bombs, suicide vests, chemical warfare and carefully coordinated attacks by trained terrorists? Not so much help. All the terrorists will do is move to a new approach. Paris is an anomaly.

[Dakine10 5,452]

Ya, i get all of that,

But from a TIMELINE perspective, sidereal motion included, the fellas posit was mostly ignored.

Yeah. Although if media coverage of the Nairobi attack was as large as the coverage of the Paris attack, he may have actually had an audience to take notice.

France has a relatively high rate of gun ownership per capita, but not easy to get a permit to carry. My feeling is France will increase security, but not increase citizen rights to carry.

[Dakine10 5,452]

This approach makes perfect sense:

In the case of Paris, it is reasonable to assume at least some lives could have been saved if folks had been armed.

Problem Solved.

And in the case of snipers, planted bombs, car bombs, suicide vests, chemical warfare and carefully coordinated attacks by trained terrorists? Not so much help. All the terrorists will do is move to a new approach. Paris is an anomaly.

In the US for example, where citizens can carry, the deadliest terrorist attacks have been by aircraft. Which is why we geared most of our security response towards that.

[lostinblue 1,989]

Yeah. Although if media coverage of the Nairobi attack was as large as the coverage of the Paris attack, he may have actually had an audience to take notice.

France has a relatively high rate of gun ownership per capita, but not easy to get a permit to carry. My feeling is France will increase security, but not increase citizen rights to carry.

And the every day common person is just a sitting duck .

[Dakine10 5,452]

And the every day common person is just a sitting duck .

If you could ever dispense with the hyperbole, I might be able to agree with you once in a while. Obviously there is risk management involved, as with everything else.

Unlike us, the French people actually have a political system that is somewhat responsive to the will of the people. If the French citizens want changes in their gun laws, they will get them.

[Póg mo 1,749]

We should supply guns, ammo, trucks, Humvees, and shoulder-fired missiles to everyone - like we did in Iraq.

That way, everyone is safer and we only have to go back in and bomb half of our own stuff instead of supplying one side and having to bomb it all.

Exactly, thanks to all the guns in Iraq, the people there have never been safer.

[Rob L 3,811]

In the US for example, where citizens can carry, the deadliest terrorist attacks have been by aircraft. Which is why we geared most of our security response towards that.

Obviously the answer is that every good citizen should keep shoulder mount surface to air weapons, Duh