One of the final stages in disarming the people of the United Kingdom is currently underway. Some of the most sensationalist and irresponsible reporting of knife-related gang, youth and individual psychotic violence ever seen is being crammed onto the screens and pages of the UK 's media outlets. Graphic knife attack stories (of which there are 100’s daily, normally getting zero national media coverage) are everywhere. Editors are being influenced to yank this stuff to the top of the table and spare none of the lurid detail.
Anyone monitoring the news virus on knives will marvel at the blatant propaganda machine in full thundering effect. The campaign message is clear: sway public opinion to fear and abhor knives. A classic Problem-Reaction-Solution procedure. Overall campaign objective: outlaw the carrying or possession of potentially lethal weapons. If the government had the people’s best interests at heart, this might represent explicable and prudent thinking. But of course, the government couldn’t care less about the people. They want the masses disarmed in these final years of capitalist-military desperation, thereby reducing the effectiveness of any possible organized resistance or revolutionary uprising.
To understand just how quickly things move in the final phases of such a campaign, it is worth noting some of the parallels between the current stage-managed knife hysteria and the 100 year drive to outlaw private ownership of firearms in Britain. It began with the Pistols Act of 1903. This seemingly rational law forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun sales could only be made to those who had a license. A clever device to establish registration, which can of course be used to track, identify and even withdraw ownership. The Firearms Act of 1920 expanded this to include not only handguns but all firearms except shotguns. Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns.
The real acceleration of the disarming began with Manchurian candidates Michael Ryan (Hungerford) and Thomas Hamilton (Dunblane). After their rampages, semi-automatic rifles, revolvers and pistols disappeared off the radar completely. Of course, as with all effective sleepers, they died at the scene of their own killing sprees. Ryan’s 1987 massacre of 16 people led to the Firearms (Amendment) Act, 1988, which banned the ownership of semi-automatic centre-fire rifles and restricted the use of other firearms with a capacity of more than two rounds. In 1996, Hamilton killed fifteen school children and a teacher after opening fire in a school gym hall. UK Parliament soon instigated a UK-wide ban on handguns. Although the Tory legislation banned only handguns greater than .22 calibre, the new Labour government went further with the Firearms (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 1997 and banned virtually all handguns. When the Dunblane Inquiry (a cover-up job) ended, citizens who owned handguns were given three months to turn them over to local authorities. Anyone who disobeyed was visited by police and threatened with a 10 year prison sentence if they didn't comply.
Hungerford was a well controlled situation. Awareness of government duplicity was astonishingly low back then. Dunblane however, left a lot of loose ends. Numerous theories arose focussing on relationships between the Central Scotland Policy, Freemasonry, George Robertson, MI6, supporters of the Snowdrop Petition and Northern Ireland terrorist organisations. Of course, nothing could be proven or substantiated.
Public outrage, dead women and children and 90 years of progressive gun control made radical policy change easy. It was soon virtually impossible to own a hand gun. Shooting clubs went out of business overnight. Some even switched to air rifles and muzzle-loading muskets in an effort to lawfully diversify and still offer something to the law abiding punters. Ridiculous. Even Olympic marksmen still have to leave the UK to practice and compete properly. The old bumper sticker that states “if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns” contains a sentiment worth considering. There is another darkly humorous gun law sticker that’s popular in the USA: “if guns are outlawed, can I still use my sword?” The answer could be a straight no.
So what are they going to outlaw next. Pitchforks? Glass bottles? Chair legs? Frying pans? Ironically, it may turn out to be the rather effective shotgun, so beloved of the English country gentleman. So if you fancy one, act now to avoid disappointment. It could prove tricky for them to ban that sacrosanct middle English grouse culling device.
Posts
