*Disclaimer-
this is only an example. I’m not blaming or implying any single or group of
things or persons, putting myself on a pedestal, bashing religion, not ‘supporting
our troops’ or doing any other dastardly things- this is just the way I see it,
and the things I chose to describe this issue. *
"People do funny things sometimes.
I remember the zodiac killer found a couple and at gunpoint forced the female
to tie up her boyfriend. He then tied her up. Keep in mind he promised them
both if they did what he said he wouldn't hurt them. And of course they
surrendered any opportunity to try and save themselves in the process.
He then raped the female in front of the boyfriend and then stabbed the
boyfriend to death in front of the female. He then stabbed the female believing
he had killed her. The zodiac killer didn't want to just "kill"
people and he wasn't interested in shooting them. He was interested in
torturing people (physically and psychologically) and prolonging their agony as
much as possible.
She lived long enough to describe what happened to them when they were found.
Now logic would inform the average person that "if he has a gun" he
doesn't need to tie us up unless he plans on doing something even worse than
shooting us.
But not everyone has or uses logic. And sadly there are thousands of people who
would be willing to tie up their boyfriend and then be tied up themselves, as
long as you promise you won't hurt them."
[Excerpt from somewhere else on the internet I can’t for the
life of me remember- all credit to whoever wrote it]
I could never understand that- people watch the news. People
watch movies. People read the paper. ALL the time through those things they're
constantly told what happens to people who follow this line of thought.
And then it's their turn and they do...... the same thing.
This is what I've never been able to reconcile in my mind-
about on par with "why shoot up a bunch of kids?"
It makes no sense whatsoever- are people really so foolish that they think
their assailant is just going to walk away afterwards?
Are they really so irrational as to believe their best defense against people
trying to kill and/or physically assault them is to hide under a desk, or puke
on the person?
Frankly, I think people these days are either so sheltered or in so much denial
they actually truly believe that they can close their eyes and hide under a
blanket and the scary monsters will go back in the closet. Of course what do
you expect in this age of "share this picture to stop Kony" and such?
Hell, people these days even think that signing some arbitrary paperwork into
law will solve the problem. Imagine that?
But then, what do you expect from people who
have been taught from birth to “turn the other cheek”?
No, Johnny- it’s WRONG to fight back against the big mean
bully- take the swirly and tell an adult later.
Which is all well and good but in essence it’s saying “Take no responsibility-
let someone else handle your problems for you.”
For all the parents starting that banshee shriek I’m all too familiar with, no,
I’m not advocating your precious little Johnny go out of his way to get into
fights at school, or be taught to resort to fists every time he encounters a
problem- I’m talking about situations that would be seriously justified.
No Johnny, you can’t point your Nerf gun at anyone- it’s WRONG!
No Johnny, you can’t bite your toaster pastry accidentally into the shape of a
gun. For shame!
No Johnny, you can’t say that/think that/do that- you might OFFEND somebody!
And the complete irony of all this? Once the kid grows a brain to the point where
he understands what’s going on around him he’s immediately smacked in the face
with a society that applauds the “good
guys” for doing the exact opposite-
“Whoa did you see that movie where the guy backflipped off the building and
shot like fifty terrorists in the face? BadASS dude!
BUT WAIT!!!
It gets better- not only is the kid now fully immersed in applauding the “good
guys” for their heroic feats of face-stabby-shootery, he’s STILL getting
bombarded with the complete hypocrisy of the “turn the other cheek” crowd who
as soon as he gets home or goes back to “school” or church, tell him all about
how “violence never solves anything.”
What.
The.
Fuck?
And on top of that you add on the really complex part- a society currently
hellbent on conformity and being “law abiding citizens” and “following the rules”
in which people who, God forbid, resort to such uncouth, uncivilized violence
when justified, are not treated the way little Johnny just got told how the
good guy gets treated for doing battle with the “bad guy”. Sorry kid- you don’t
get the girl, you don’t save the town, you don’t get a medal, and you may not
live to fight another day- best case, “ordered law abiding” society shuns you
for daring to have a spine, worst case you go to jail. Do not pass go, do not
collect 200 dollars. Oh, and the other “good guys” might kill you too.
Because you see, violent solutions to violent problems are
good as long as it’s sanctioned violence by approved organizations. Remember
that saying along the lines of “people sleep soundly at night because rough men
stand ready to do violence on their behalf”?
Truth, but there’s that pesky “turn the other cheek so you don’t have to take
responsibility for anything” again.
Police overstepping their authority to “maintain order” and catch the bad guys?
Awesome- make it a movie!
Military wastes hundreds of Taliban in a single engagement? Hell yeah! Make a
sequel!
Random homeowner shoots one violent felon with a “societally incorrect”
firearm? Bad boy! Shame on you! No cookie! Lawsuit! Ban!
See?
As long as the violent solution implies that Average Joe keeps his head down
and keeps shuffling along, it’s all good. If the violent solution implies
Average Joe growing a spine, well, now we can’t have that can we? Average Joe
may learn to take responsibility for himself, and think and question, and all
manner of other sordid devil worship that will surely lead to anarchy in the
streets and gunfights at high noon.
So they offer other solutions such as cower in the corner, hide under a desk,
puke, fart, hold your breath and wave your arms wildly to appear large and
threatening, fire off two shotgun blasts from your home each evening before
bed, and so on. Anything BUT actual effective options.
People want to complain about the “culture of violence” that all society’s ills
can be blamed on, but what we have bred is a culture of NON-violence, where
people will literally clutch at straws to appear peaceable and nonthreatening.
Anything so we don’t lose our place in the herd.
And frankly, anything so there’s weak, vulnerable masses of people begging for
their “first responders” to drop out of the sky and save them.
Hey, I didn’t say I liked it either, but you can’t have a bunch of knights in
shining armor sitting around without a dragon to slay, now can you? Especially
after they’ve just been outfitted with the latest
killy-shooty-armor-tank-thingies.
Actually,
that’s a good analogy that we’re seeing repeated here today- back in medieval times
you had the mounted Knight, who was the pinnacle of warfighting power, and an
avatar of honor and justice. Not just anybody could become a knight, and those
that were able had to jump through about sixty-three thousand hoops to get
there. You still had the average soldiery but there were things that ONLY the
knights were- supposedly- capable of accomplishing.
And then suddenly (I’m sure I’m getting my history out of order again) there’s
this ragtag band of Scots who rendered the knight obsolete with sharp wooden
sticks.
Or suddenly there’s a crossbow that ANY person can shoot that can punch right
through all that expensive armor.
And then of course the current almighty leveler in the form of firearms.
Look at today- our current law enforcement (sorry guys- going on another
bashfest) is SO highly trained, SO elite that ONLY they can handle certain
weapons, ONLY they can handle certain situations and ONLY they are capable of
stopping crime (and probably forest fires next). And yet in the face of all this
bluster there is incompetence, arrogance, and a sense of “how dare you NOT need
us to come and save you?”
Suddenly many people have realized that most of our daily dragons can be dealt
with, with sharp wooden sticks and with Law enforcement officials functioning
in the “limited government” mode of being the general overseers on law and
“justice” instead of the sole dispensers of it.
But we’re in a situation that in order to maintain the status quo of “need” our
officials create bigger and nastier dragons of paper that “only they” can
handle, in order to keep their position in the “noble” class.
But I digress enough.
Ok,
so say you can convince people that they need to respond “in kind” when life
and limb are at stake.
Guess what- they STILL want to gussy it up with all sorts of cute rules to play
by. Like it’s going to be some honorable duel at thirty paces or something.
“Oh,
I’ll just shoot the gun out of his hand” or “I’ll just shoot him in the leg/eye/butt/etc,
or my personal favorite recently appearing on a recent AAR for a training
class- “I only want to learn “defensive” tactics- there’s no need for all that
hyper aggressive stuff. What, are you planning on fighting a war?”
They still don’t get that you can’t “turn the other cheek” and expect the bad
guy to just walk away if you make a nice speech or rattle your saber loud
enough- once that person sees an opening- once you show them a weakness, and an
unwillingness to follow up your threat of violence with actual violence- and
not just enough to make them “go away” but full on “someone isn’t walking away
today and it’s gonna be you” violence- you’ve just lost the fight.
A self defense instructor I once met said “intent is half the battle- does your
opponent really believe you’re going to carry through with what you say you’re
going to do?”
And therein lies the problem- a lifetime of conflicting points of view bred and
inculcated into us all since day one causes fear that we might not make the
“Right” choice- not the “correct” choice mind you- the “right” choice that will
be deemed acceptable by twelve of your “peers”. Fear causes hesitation,
hesitation signals weakness…and checkmate. You lose.
And people wonder why when some poor lady is getting repeatedly stabbed in the
street no-one rushes to help….
Which actually brings us to another interesting digression on this topic-
Why do bad things happen to good people?
Well, I’ll tell you- because the good people don’t do anything to STOP the bad
things from happening.
Ok, sure maybe I’m over-generalizing a little bit- there’s
plenty happening that nothing would stop, that you simply can’t do anything
about. Like they say- shit happens. But those instances are not what I’m
talking about. To help explain, let’s talk about the role religion plays in all
this. Don’t worry- I put on a fire retardant suit before I started this, and I
have a ‘sticks ‘n stones’ proof shield as well, as I’m sure this will piss some
of you off- but hear me out before you start slinging;
I grew up in a certain brand of religion that was very big
on the whole “turn the other cheek” thing. There was a lot of emphasis on
nonviolence, “conscientious objection” to military service, no ownership of
firearms, “pray for those that despitefully use you” and other kumbaya stuff.
Which is all well and good- I never said everyone had to be a badass
gunslinger, and a real hero during WW2, Desmond Doss, was supposedly a conscientious
objector. So if that’s what gets you through the day, than more power to you.
But the error that I perceived is the incessant motto of “God will protect me,”
but then these people go out and make absolutely no personal effort to back
that up- or worse, end up taking only half-measures because they hamstring themselves
trying to comply with some arbitrary set of rules. It’s like the old saying-
the Lord helps those that help themselves. Or in biblical terms “do not tempt
the Lord thy God…”
A story was told about a man in a town that was being about to be flooded. His
neighbors packed their van and prepared to leave town for higher ground, but
when the man was asked to join them he declined saying “no thanks! God will
save me.” So the people left town and the water came up and soon the man was on
the second floor of his home, when a boat came motoring by- and the people on
the boat saw the man alone in the flooding house and said “jump into the boat
and come with us!” and the man said “No thanks! God will save me.” So the
people in the boat left.
Soon the water came up so high the man was forced onto his roof. Then a
helicopter came by, and the crew saw him on the roof and lowered the winch and
called him to climb on and they would haul him up and take him to safety. But
the man waved them off saying “No thanks! God will save me.”
Finally the water came up over the roof of the house, and the man drowned.
When he got to heaven, he went directly to God and said “I prayed for help all
day- why didn’t you save me from the flood?” Confused, God looked at the man
and said “but I sent you a van and a boat and a helicopter…..”
I personally know people who can see what’s coming around
the bend, and yet act just like that guy in the story- or worse they take
actions that are perceived as “acceptable” by society or their chosen religion
(the “right” actions), and completely ignore the very actions (the “correct”
actions) that would actually count when what they fear will happen does happen.
Like the sort of people that grow a vegetable garden to prepare for the “end
times” or whatever, but don’t have any other food or supplies stocked up.
Or that have the stocks, but don’t have the means to defend themselves.
Or that think that they may have to pull an Iron Maiden and run to the hills,
but don’t have so much as a pack to carry their stuff, not to mention zero
plans whatsoever for how they would actually carry out such an action.
Or that carry on about their lives in public, blissfully unaware of everything
going on around them because their faces are glued to their phones.
And then they wonder why Johnny got hit by a car, or when the FSA is raiding
their neighborhood why their food is gone and their wife is being gangraped in
front of them.
BUT WE WERE SUCH GOOD PEOPLE! We weren’t violent, we just wanted to be left
alone, and we went to church every week! How can this happen to us? Why isn’t
there fire and brimstone raining down on these evil horrible people who did none
of the things we did our whole lives to be better than them?
These
sort of folk just will never get it- there’s nothing wrong in trusting the Lord
to see you through, but also realize that that NOT everyone is your “neighbor”,
they’re not going to care how holy and nonviolent you are when they’re stabbing
you in the face, and the only fire and brimstone raining down to smite your
enemies is going to be coming from the barrel of whatever firearm you happen to
be holding at the time.
Don’t believe me? Let’s take another little trip back in history from around
the 1100’s to 1700’s and talk about the Waldensians (or Waldenses) and the
Vaudois (which are somewhat interchangeable terms describing the same folk).
To make a very long story short, the Waldenses were a religious group started
by Peter Valdes, also known as Peter Wado (hence, Waldensians) who decided to
translate the Bible into the common language instead of Latin so everybody
could read it, and split from the Catholic church as he and his followers found
that form of religion to be disagreeable. Needless to say, the Catholic church
got pretty pissed off about this, and the Waldenses were designated heretics
for their beliefs. With typical Catholic zeal, beginning in the 1200s the
Waldenses began to face fierce persecution from the church, and in order to
avoid further violence began to migrate out of the towns and cities into the
mountains.
What followed over the next few centuries was a long succession of invasions
into the Piedmont mountains, backed by the Papal church and various local governments
to follow up on the extermination order of 1487 put out by Pope Innocent III-
who of course was nothing of the sort his name would suggest- which led to massacre
after massacre of the most vile atrocities- you see, these were simply peaceable,
nonviolent people who only wanted to be left alone to practice their religion,
so they did what normal peaceable nonviolent people do in these situations-
they back off. And payed for it every
time- look up the names Torre
Pellice, Villar Pellice, Luserna, Gianavella, Rora, Lorenzo, Bobbio Pellice, Chanforan,
Serra and the Angrogna Valley- the picture at the top is a monument commemorating
some of the sites of these famous massacres that usually involved carnage like
this:
"Little children were torn from the arms
of their mothers, clasped by their tiny feet, and their heads dashed against
the rocks; or were held between two soldiers and their quivering limbs torn up
by main force. Their mangled bodies were then thrown on the highways or fields,
to be devoured by beasts. The sick and the aged were burned alive in their
dwellings. Some had their hands and arms and legs lopped off, and fire applied
to the severed parts to staunch the bleeding and prolong their suffering. Some were
flayed alive, some were roasted alive, some disemboweled; or tied to trees in
their own orchards, and their hearts cut out. Some were horribly mutilated, and
of others the brains were boiled and eaten by these cannibals. Some were
fastened down into the furrows of their own fields, and ploughed into the soil
as men plough manure into it. Others were buried alive. Fathers were marched to
death with the heads of their sons suspended round their necks. Parents were
compelled to look on while their children were first outraged [raped], then
massacred, before being themselves permitted to die."
[Wikipedia- Peter Liegé concerning the ‘Piedmont Easter’]
I believe it was at Torre Pellice that mass numbers of these peaceable folk
were thrown from a cliff to their deaths, and at various caves across the
countryside they retreated to, they were literally smoked out and then
slaughtered as chronicled above.
There were a few times that the various governing powers of the times offered
them their rights and freedoms free from persecution, but until the very end
they always went back on their word and the killing would start again.
So I think we can all agree that “turning the other cheek wasn’t working out so
well for these folk.
However, it wasn’t always all death and destruction for the Waldensians- sometimes
they’d manage to turn things the other way- there are numbers of examples of
the Waldenses retreating to places the armies chasing them couldn’t get to, and
hurling the very boulders down on their heads. Two of the most notable Waldensian heroes of the time were Henri
Arnaud, and Joshua Janavel.
Janavel, often better known as Giosue Gianavello, was a
Condottiero farmer, so he had some military experience. In the 1600’s when the
Duke of Savoy decided to launch an attack, this relatively wealthy farmer
decide he was having none of that, and went to lead the Vaudois resistance,
leading to the invaders’ repulse at Rora. Even though this victory was short
lived, he became known as “The Lion of Rora” and continued to lead the
Waldensian resistance forces for many years, even using his own house as a headquarters despite having
his family kidnapped to force his surrender, and a bounty placed on his head. When
the Waldensians returned to their lands in 1686, despite being too old to
participate, Gianavello drafted the orders for the military portion of the expedition,
which was eventually successful.
Henri Arnaud was a Waldensian pastor, who turned military
leader to help save the Waldenses from annihilation (again…). After the Duke of
Savoy issued an edict requiring all Waldensians to lay down their arms in 8
days and go into exile, or face death, Arnaud appealed to them to resist
instead of fleeing.
Having convinced the majority to keep their arms and fight, when the 8-week
truce expired the Waldensians were ready for battle. After a 6 week fight, they
had taken heavy losses and the war seemed decided in the invaders’ favor.
However, like Gianavello, Arnaud escaped with a large enough force to carry on
a guerrilla war that would earn his forces the nickname of “Invincibles”, and
win the release of all Vaudois prisoners, the alliance of William of Orange,
and the eventual “Glorious Return” of the dispossessed Waldenses to the
Piedmont region.
Gentlemen (and women), I
cannot think of a way to sum up what I am trying to say here any better than
that. Actually, wait I can- In closing let me sum up the meaning of this in the
words of some men much wiser than me who have ‘been there done that’:
“…Still, if
you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if
you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may
come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you
and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You
may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to
perish than live as slaves.”
“Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror,
victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no
survival.”
-Winston Churchill
“The price of freedom is the willingness to do sudden
battle anywhere, anytime, and with utter recklessness.”
-R.A. Heinlein
“If you fight with all your might, there is a chance at
life; whereas death is certain if you cling to your corner.”
-Sun Tzu
Why Surrender Is NeverAn Option
Article by Larry Mudgett- Gunsite, USMC
