Tag Archives: weapons

When the Law is not on our side, hard cases make bad Law

David Davis

Knife crime

There are things which need to be said about the horrific murder of “Ben Kinsella”. I didn’t do it at the time, because we were diverted by expenses stuff and slaying GramscoFabianazis, for other and more global crimes. Stalin said I think that “one death is a tragedy, but many are a statistic” – I hope we are not getting like him. Now, as to people like Ben Kinsella, I often put these people’s names in parantheses, whether they are alive, or increasingly these days sadly dead, because I do not really know who they are. They get in the news via minor celebrity-connections, and tragically sometimes meet with misfortune: not that I’d wish misfortune on any human being, and certainly not being stabbed in a dark street, whether in front of people or otherwise. But what happens to them matters, as it throws up signals about what the Enemy Class are trying to do to us all.

For foreign readers unfamiliar, this poor young man was the younger brother of a moderately-famous “TV” “soaps” “actress”. He by all accounts had a bright future and everything going for him (…er…these unfortunate people always do…so why doesn’t everyone?) and got knifed to death in a London street some months ago. It was something to do with being on the periphery of, but in the line of vision of, some GramscoFabiaNazi-engendered-underthugs who have been created on purpose to execute acts like this, outside a “bar” in a rather exciting area of London, well after dark: he and his “mates” having attracted the afforesaid attentions and enquiry-facility of the said droid-underthugs, whose *.exe file acts as a caller-to-dll, to “demand respect”.

When you remove guns, major criminals will pile heavily into guns, and use them all the time, as is the case in the UK today. These people fear nothing, for they know that nobody except their turf-enemies (who will be dead) and the Police, who are (not dead but) bribable –  being Gramscian State-agents – has guns. Minor criminals, such as people with plangent and honourable names such as “Lee”, “Ricky”, “Winston”, “Leroy”, “Patience”,  “Praise-the-Lord-Small-Glass-Ball”, “Duane”, and the like, will take the low road, and will get more simple weaponry for otherwise inconveniencing ordinary people who are in the way. This can mean knives, for knives are freely available for lawful and incontrovertible reasons, and you can hurt people with knives if you know what to do (it’s not as easy as it looks on film.)

The solution to “knifecrime”, as with “guncrime”, is to allow individuals to carry concealed weapons. Being as old as I am, I cannot imagine any normal grown man going about without at least a sharp and multibladed pen-knife in his pocket, as we did as boys in the 1950s. It was what you did – it was your job, and you’d been shown how to whittle sharp sticks with it by your granfather: it was what our fathers and grandfathers did all day, after fighting wars. Students whom I teach are shocked and scandalised and in awe of the fact that this was what we did: if they did so much as go into school with a folded pen-knife in their pocket, they would certainly be “suspended” and possibly “excluded”. I caused a minor stir at the Liverpool office of the Passsport Agency nearly three years ago, when one (with a fortunately short blade, under the minimum length for summary arrest, having been so sharpened for so many decades) was lifted from me by the metal-searching-machine: I have carried it for 49 years. I would no more think of sticking this item into another human than I would fly through the air. But if in a sticky situation in the Small Hours, “in the wrong place at the wrong time” (terrible phrase used by Armed Police who shoot people) it might save my life. Similar items moght save others.

Poor Ben Kinsella was killed because of these things:

(1) He was in a silly place – as a teenager you do NOT go to interesting and exciting bars in shaky places, and _in the night too_ , specially if you have a sexy sister who is on the Wireless Tele Vision, and so you might be a bit known,given what GramscoFabiaNazis have done on purpose to create an agressive and uncontrollable subclass of orcs,

(2) He was unused to personal hand-weapons, probably having grown up in a culture where their very mention is taboo, and thus both unable not only to use them, but more vitally, to parry the blows without too much injury to himself,

(3) He grew up in a culture where you “celebrate” something, such as GCSEs (what’s there to celebrate?) by going to the very places where the gramscoFabiaNazis have put killer-droids masquerading as gin-traps for the unwary.

The Bad Law comes in when our “legislators” recommend huge prison sentences – or worse – for “knife crime”. The solution is threefold: (a) better people, and the elimination of deliberate Gramscian destruction of that fragile fabric of society which gives rise to “better people”, (b) remembrance of the fact that one has a duty to protect one’s own life and that of those one loves, since the State is currently so bad it this job, and (c) not to be railroaded by the MSM into meekly accepting bad abd draconian limitations on one’s own ability to protect against the temporary (hopefully) products of GramscoFabiaNazism.

Worrying stuff

We have been alerted to this by an Ian Parker-Joseph piece, flagged also by The Landed Underclass. As many foreign readers as possible had better know what’s going on and rumbling suspiciously under the surface here. This must be before the BBC (and other almost equally-reprehensible News channels) tell them something quite different in their usual oily authoritarian tone.

Bloggers, and especially liberal and libertarian ones, are specially sensitive people, reading a lot as one does, and also ignoring – largely – the MsM, which we find to be increasingly unhelpful and useless as a real information source. We have sensed tension “in the air” for some time now.

Dungeekin had a go at this idea also, back-end of last year. And Legiron, on 26th February, warned people _not to_ riot or even “take to the streets”, as this would give the British régime just the excuse it wanted in order to invoke all its “special powers” it has awarded itself while everyone’s back was turned. you have to wonder where the Queen stands in all this – not that there’s any hope she could arrest the seemingly inevitable course of events which we now mostly suspect.

(I don’t know why that’s all underlined, and I can’t get rid of the underscoring, sorry.)

We guess that what should be done, to anyone who is ostensibly _not_ some form of “Interior Ministry Troops” and who appears to be trying to stir up trouble, is this: that they should immediately be bundled by five or six burly brickies into the nearest white van, and taken somewhere quiet, in order to spend a period of reflection in the company of people determined to find the truth. Although the future life of the brickies may be nasty and short, at least information will be gained about what is to be faced.

“24-hour-drinking” is not the problem … the government is.

David Davis

Police “chiefs” complain about “24-hour drinking”. I don’t know about you, but I don’t tend to come across binge-drinkers blind-drunk at say 10.40 am in the morning. Or even 7.55 am. Or 2.14 pm. Do you, or I, or does anybody you know, or have ever seen, drink for 24 hours a day? No, I thought not.

No. The problem is not that this guvmint has relaxed the licensing laws. This is a sound move and takes away the smell of distrust of the British people, imposed on them since WW1, when it was thought that without these we would be too drunk to make shells properly. it is an unconscionable piece of farm-animalery to suggest that a sane man ought not to be able to buy a beer at 6.40 in the morning, or at any time it pleases him so to do….and drink it too. When I used to drive to what was then called Czechslovakia, one regularly stopped one’s fast car after about 16 hours from London, at a roadside caff in Plzen or Stribro in West Bohemia, and you could have a large Becherovka, or a Vyskov-11 (about a pint or more) with your coffee.

The autobahn probably goes round those places now…and I expect that the dear Czech Police would string me up for what I have just said…but it was 1991-92 and all was new and bright, and the West had won, and people were happy, and the girls just wanted to have us…..

No, the problems lie elsewhere:-

(1) This is a coolish and nearly-always-damp island, in which one surviving pleasure is to crawl into your mud hut in the late afternoon with mates, soddden and muddy and shitty after a day in the fields slding about in the cowpoo, and down a few beers or more and joke about how the Bail-Reeve fell into the worst and deepest pile. The British drink alcohol regularly in industrial amounts: it is our job.

(2) Sex is not that great any more as a substitute for alcohol, unless you are

(a) very lucky with one or a few wenches well known to yourself, or else,

(b) the Feminazi revolution has somehow passed you by.

(3) If this guvmmint wanted socialism in a post-capitalist-civilisation and therefore (it would have to create) a de-educated populace, which it has tried personfully to bring into being, and which it could push about like in 1984, then it has succeeded. This populace will behave like irresponsible farm-animals, because that’s what it has been forced to become (the responsible ones are all dead.)

If you treat people like children, and deny them knowledge and understanding, then unsocialised children is what you will get. (You will probably have to ban guns, knives…lasers ( a new one, to be advanced for a ban at a local newspaper near you, and soon…..see the Southport Visiter! And yes thatt iz how itt izz spelled!)…..airguns…..kitchen-knives, soon?…..to stop them murdering each other, let alone you and your apparatchiks……) (“Nobody hurt in milk float crash”)

(4) If it thought it could raise alcohol excise duty takes by lengthening opening hours, then it is probably right. The overall sterling value of revenue has probably risen – that’s poss why it can afford to nationalise the Banks (paid for mostly by poor-people – could not the National Lottery have done it? More appropriate….)

People who are going to get rat-arsed in public, are going to do it in the early-to-late-evening, as they always would have been and have been able to do. So I think the rozzers have got the wrong end of the stick somehow.

You can’t be “against” a physical object: only against the people that use them to kill.

David Davis

I have just got in and seen this. Without having to read it, I know exactly what it says. It’s like shagging Elizabeth Taylor (when she was young and pretty): one did not need to, for one could imagine precisely what it would be like.

Among those speaking out against violence is the singer, Jamelia, who said: “If you stay silent you’re part of the problem.”

I’ve no clue who “Jamelia” is, at all, but I’m not going to be silent, so I must therefore be part of the solution.

The problem of knives is created by socialism, used as it is as a weapon to destroy liberal civilisation.

Socialism, existing as it does and pursuing the Fabian ends that it does in liberal civilisations, causes the production of unsocialised young hominids. These have been put through a Hegelian dialectic sausage-machine of non-education, and therefore they end up, in their teens, functionally adults, with the minds and cogitatory power of chimpanzees.

There are two things we could do:-

(1) Send the Police (remember them?) round every household in the nation, armed and wearing “stab-me”-vests (they’ll have to be, and it will have to be at 4.00 am) and collect up ALL knives. All kitchen knives, pen-knives, chisels, blades of electric-planes, screwdrivers (how sharp are some of the smaller ones, eh!) Stanley-knives and all loose blades, loose razor-blades (must be some still about) modelling and craft tools, and scissors. Axes (better make sure.)

Ordinary garden shears, such as for “edging” a lawn…. I could think of several ways to make someone suffer with those – much better also, against a knife-hoodie in a dark alley, after clubbing and finding yourself out too late at night, eh, sonny? Like a sword against a knife, and the blunter the better – hurts more, and the bone will mend less well!

As this is New-Lieborg, decree an “unlimited” fine and “life” imprisonment. for resisting or with-holding any item proscribed. This will of course play well with “Brooke Kinsella” (whoever she may be.)

It shows great love and empathy and “feeling of pain”. It’s “good television”. The government can pretend that “a full-scale enquiry into the initiation of strategically-focussed and pro-active initiatives” for “addressing the comcerns of” “young people” and (I bet 50p) “working mothers”, is “planned”, to be “in place” by [sometime or other].

(2) Or…

You could (a) arrest, and immediately intern in the Udenopticon, all lefties and other fascist recipients of State-salaries, who have had the bad fortune to be caught with their trousers down and their wallets thus clearly open and gaping, in “Public Service” posts to do with education, employment, crime, local government, policing, schools, “prison reform”, “outreach”, “culture”, (regulation of)country-pursuits, “traffic management”, parking services”,  “Congestion control”, “countryside issues”, and the like.

That should get the f*****g criminals anti-liberal-pre-capitalist-barbarian buggers off the street for the present, ot a place of safety, where they can be “resettled”, for a time to be determined (by due legal process) and enjoy each other’s company in a “natural” environment. Very natural indeed; it ought to suit their deep-green tendencies.

(b) You could train everyone, at least all males (besides basic grammar, maths, writing, Latin and Greek, the history of Western art and music, and joined-up-English history from 2000 BC to 2008) in the use of knives and guns, to defend your loved ones. They would HAVE loved ones, unlike now, after about two generations, if this project was to go ahead. Yeh, it could take that long, so much damage has been done.

The result of this is that guns and knives will be respected and will NOT be carried about as socialist status symbols. It will take some time – at least a generation, and probably two. The poor bastards probably have never heard the word “socialist”, let alone have any inkling of what it means for the destruction of human civilisation, and why their carrying and use of knives now, as weapons if intimidation and murder, is so useful to New-Lieborg.

This raises questions about the death penalty. I am against it, as of now, as “used” by States. This is because I cannot delegate a right, to any agency or another person, to carry out an act which I have no right, as things stand, to do. if I had the right to cary arms to defend my and mine, then I would have the right to kkoll in that defence. In that case, i can delegate the right to a suitably limited state. but these do not now exist, so I can’t.

Have the Trash Who Rule Us Done Something Half-Decent?

Sean Gabb

(For those not familiar with the background to this story, the Blogmaster adds a comment:-

Since the Socialists set out to destroy British civilisation in earnest for what they thought would need only to be the last time, in May 1997, there have been carefully-disguised but also sharply-rising crime levels against the person.  In particular a recent spate of lethal stabbings of (mostly) teenagers and young men, in the citadels of New-Labour-urban-Stalinist-Soviets, such as Britain’s major cities – where their Political Writ runs most surely.

So……the government seems intent on letting citizens take back some of the burden of law-enforcement and retribution. Truly, we are heading backwards into the future. The real solution is of couorse based on only two things:-

(1) Better people, this to be ensured (but it will take some time) by abolishing all the trappings of politically-correct socialist “education strategy” in the UK,

(2) Armed people, which is to say that weapons, possibly up to and including semi-automatic firearms, may be kept by Freeholders or (nett) taxpayers.)

(3) And here’s some other stuff about crime statistics and “reporting” of same.


Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 (c. 4)
  Main body
  Part 5 Criminal law

Reasonable force for purposes of self-defence etc.
This section applies where in proceedings for an offence
an issue arises as to whether a person charged with the offence ( D) is entitled to rely on a defence within subsection (2), and
the question arises whether the degree of force used by D against a person ( V) was reasonable in the circumstances.
The defences are
the common law defence of self-defence; and
the defences provided by section 3(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 (c. 58) or section 3(1) of the Criminal Law Act (Northern Ireland) 1967 (c. 18 (N.I.))(use of force in prevention of crime or making arrest).
Click to open 76 Reasonable force for purposes of self-defence etc.Prospective - this provision has not yet been brought into effect


The question whether the degree of force used by D was reasonable in the circumstances is to be decided by reference to the circumstances as D believed them to be, and subsections (4) to (8) also apply in connection with deciding that question.
If D claims to have held a particular belief as regards the existence of any circumstances
the reasonableness or otherwise of that belief is relevant to the question whether D genuinely held it; but
if it is determined that D did genuinely hold it, D is entitled to rely on it for the purposes of subsection (3), whether or not
it was mistaken, or
(if it was mistaken) the mistake was a reasonable one to have made.
Prospective Version Click to view attributes for this levelProspective - this provision has not yet been brought into effect

Self-defence etc.

But subsection (4)(b) does not enable D to rely on any mistaken belief attributable to intoxication that was voluntarily induced.
The degree of force used by D is not to be regarded as having been reasonable in the circumstances as D believed them to be if it was disproportionate in those circumstances.
In deciding the question mentioned in subsection (3) the following considerations are to be taken into account (so far as relevant in the circumstances of the case)
that a person acting for a legitimate purpose may not be able to weigh to a nicety the exact measure of any necessary action; and
that evidence of a person’s having only done what the person honestly and instinctively thought was necessary for a legitimate purpose constitutes strong evidence that only reasonable action was taken by that person for that purpose.
Subsection (7) is not to be read as preventing other matters from being taken into account where they are relevant to deciding the question mentioned in subsection (3).
This section is intended to clarify the operation of the existing defences mentioned in subsection (2).
In this section
legitimate purpose means
the purpose of self-defence under the common law, or
the prevention of crime or effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of persons mentioned in the provisions referred to in subsection (2)(b);
references to self-defence include acting in defence of another person; and
references to the degree of force used are to the type and amount of force used.
« Older Entries