That\’s a surprise, eh?

British hotels are vulnerable to Mumbai-style attacks, anti-terrorist officers warn

Who would have thought that a free society was vulnerable to hordes of maniacs firing automatic weapons?

Rather more importantly, what can a free society do about such vulnerability without not being a free society? Might it not be better to suck up the vulnerability but remain free?

4 comments on “That\’s a surprise, eh?

  1. Well if the free society felt its free citizens (those of good character) could be trusted with firearms, then someone on the spot could fire back. It wouldn’t stop such outrages- but it would limit the effects.

  2. A trite but telling comment from many USA citizens-“The constitution wasn’t intended to be a suicide pact”.

  3. “Who would have thought that a free society was vulnerable to hordes of maniacs firing automatic weapons?”
    Not all free societies are vulnerables to hordes of Muslim maniacs. Like e.g. Poland because fortunately they (unlike us) did not have large scale Muslim immigration. The more we, the more vulnerable we will be.

  4. I’m with Pat here. It is only because our freedoms have been compromised and restricted that we are vulnerable in the first place.

    If you can shoot him right back, that is ultimate freedom. And not just for you, for all the folk he would have killed next.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.