Knockout

So, back in Sheepdog, we discussed the LAX shooting, and the (hopeful) collapse of the “it can’t happen here” mindset. The following week, in Reality, NOLATAC provided more evidence against that mindset with two stories from New Orleans; one regarding a disabled man who was beaten and robbed, and another involving a man and his 7-month-old son being killed. The two stories were used by NOLATAC as examples of “the world we live in.”

Now, we have what is probably the biggest block of evidence yet against that mindset. The mainstream emergence of the so-called “knockout game.” This “game” (the fact that it is referred to as a game is sick) involves the “player” randomly punching another person with the intent of knocking them out and perhaps robbing them. It’s participants are almost exclusively black teenagers; pseudo-gangsta types. It’s targets are generally Whites, Asians, and more recently Jews.

This week, we dive in feet-first. Coverage of recent attacks, mainstream media’s attempts to ignore or tactfully avoid rougher parts of the story (race, for example), and the obvious implications for concealed/open carry. We will close with some discussion on open carry, and a few gun laws that may be coming down the pipe.

By the way, before we go anywhere, I would like to highly recommend the book “White Girl Bleed A Lot” by Colin Flaherty. A top-notch look at some of the racially-motivated violence the media would rather not discuss. With that in mind, let’s get to the Run.

1.) Recent. Recent attacks have been found in mostly urban areas throughout the nation. We’ve seen a few in Pittsburgh, PA (a re-emergence from last year, frankly); Washington, DC; and Brooklyn, NY among others.

There doesn’t seem to be much motivation for the attacks other than the “fun” of almost killing someone and/or almost getting arrested. That and raw boredom.

2.) Ignorance and Irony. Breitbart has two stories out that highlight some of the more interesting parts of this “new” story. (Truth is, it’s been on the side-streams for months.) The first is how the major networks, which made a national issue out of a local trial (Zimmerman, if that weren’t obvious) are suddenly not all that interested in covering another, much larger race/violence issue.

The other is a note that a lot of the attacks seem to occur in areas where the citizenry has been mostly disarmed or is dealing with absurd gun laws. In other words, these thugs are attacking mostly in areas where they have a distinct advantage.

The “knockout game” breaks a ton of narratives. It sees blacks as not the victims, but the primary attackers. It is almost completely random, and takes place in urban centers. Above all, it brings to light an aspect of the world that the media doesn’t want to focus on; a very real, underlying culture of violence that exists in many inner-city neighborhoods. Whether it’s these random attacks, drug deals leading to innocents being killed in the crossfire. It’s easy to focus on the occasional “mass shooting” and point to “mental health” or “lax gun laws.” It’s a lot harder to suggest that some people are just looking for someone to hurt, for any reason they choose. It’s even harder to assume that people have made a game out of aggravated assault. And yet, here we are, with evidence of both. This is probably the biggest argument in favor of carrying firearms that we have seen in years.

On that subject, let us switch gears to focus on firearms.

3.) Open Carry. There is perhaps no better “stay away from me” signal than openly carrying a firearm. However, this tends to be a controversial issue even within the firearms community. An article on Monderno this week, written by Aaron Cowan of GA-based Sage Dynamics provided an LEO’s perspective on civilian OC. It reads in part

I support responsible open carry. I do not support open carry as a political statement, or a means to incite possible negative contact with law enforcement. I know, as you do, that our Constitutional Rights and our Second Amendment Rights specifically are very emotional subjects, as they should be. I consider the protection of all constitutional rights a responsibility of the people that they protect. When it comes to open carry, the obvious (and correct) explanation to those who do not agree with it is that it is their right by law to do so and in some states, the only manner a firearm can be carried in a lawful manner. I also agree with this. What I do not agree with is someone exercising a right but not being morally responsible in doing so. With the carry of a firearm comes the responsibility to know how to use it and the responsibility to keep it out of the hands, to the best of your ability, those who would use it to harm innocent people. With an openly carried firearm you are announcing to anyone who recognizes it for what it is, that there is a firearm present. I won’t go into the usual hyperbole some use about the subject but I will say this; everywhere you go, you are carrying with you the means to take a life and protect life and it should be accorded the appropriate respect. Without cherry picking specific situations I have encountered, I think each of us can remember a time when we observed someone carrying a firearm openly in an unsafe manner. Using a holster without retention or an obvious lack of situational awareness are but two ways that an OC can and does look like food to anyone with the inclination and the ability to take their weapon.

4.) Backlash. The Armed Novelist sent me a report about a new poll suggesting that Colorado governor John Hickenlooper may be in trouble come election time next year. A Quinnipiac poll out this week suggests that 49% of voters say the Governor does not deserve to be re-elected. Getting Hickenlooper out of office has been a prime objective for CO gun advocates since the recall elections that cost 2 anti-gun State lawmakers their seats.

5.) Looking ahead. Finally tonight, news from The Hill about the Obama administration looking for new gun regulations. Obama admin officials are reportedly targeting stolen and missing weapons. Gun control proponents say that lost or stolen guns, especially ones that disappear from gun stores, “feeds the sort of already large and existing secondary market on guns.”

What those regulations are exactly, has not been released to the public, but it is something to keep an eye on. There doesn’t seem to be much of a chance of Congressional movement on guns for the rest of this year.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s