This is an article I was asked to write in the style of Jonathan Swift as part of my coursework. Please note that nothing contained in this article represents my personal opinion on the subject discussed.
"Smoking is soon to be banned in public places across the UK. Such a bizarre move is clearly another example of the government succumbing to the pressure of a few eccentric activists in the name of political correctness.
"We are to be stripped of one of our only solaces in a world with more daily stressors than ever before. Shopping in an over-crowded supermarket of blithering fools blocking aisles with their trolleys; festering in a traffic jam at five p.m. on a Monday night; attempting to put the kids to bed just as they develop a sudden case of acute hyperactivity; these are the times when the cigarette is our saviour.
"Many a public brawl in the cornflake aisle has undoubtedly been prevented by the prospective perpetrators popping outside before throwing a punch to smoke away their stress.
"Without these merciful sticks of sanity, we will be reduced to a mob of edgy lunatics in desperate need of some anger management therapy (much pricier than a couple of packets of Marlboro Lights a week). The number of car accidents would also be bound to increase due to irate motorists taking to ramming cars off the road like dodgems.
"Indeed, some scientists have even gone so far as to suggest that smoking may prevent the onset of dementia. ‘So if your time is nearly up anyway, and you have somehow managed to steer a course past the Scylla and Charybdis of heart attacks and tumours, smoking might just help you retain your marbles.’
"But smoking is not just beneficial to national Mental Health statistics. An obesity epidemic is sweeping the Western world. The UK is one of the biggest culprits, with 46% of men and 32% of women overweight and 17% of men and 21% of women obese. The solution to the problem is blindingly obvious, yet widely ignored: smoking.
Yes, there are a few negative implications associated with the habit. Similarly harmful associations also apply to driving cars, but we have yet to see the mass pedestrianisation of the UK in a bid to minimise crashes - which will be necessary if the ban goes ahead (and this will pose problems in itself, as many smokers suffer from asthma already. Surely it is an abuse of human rights to force people with delicate chests to hike everywhere on foot?)
"Obesity causes all kinds of health worries in itself, such as heart disease or even heart attack. Surely the discerning British public would prefer to look trim and have lower stress levels than to be fat, angry and prone to heart attack at any minute?"
Monday, November 27, 2006
Violence should not be prevented
Hairbands, moisturisers, hair straighteners, hair products, skirts, manicures, facials, handbags and make up. Welcome to the new age metro sexual man. Where men emulate woman’s vanity.
Forget the gender bending eighties- that was not where the decline of manliness started. It was simply a way for men desperately seeking attention to get noticed. The 2000s has been the decade when it has become the social norm for men to act as women. Gender bending was deliberately obscure- but this is gender blending- and it marks the death of the alpha male.
The male is giving up the battle to save a long held identity all too easily, but there’s a simple reason for this. You can’t win a battle without fighting- and man’s right to fight has been removed.
Man have been fighting for as long as it has existed. Violence was often over women, food and land- but these were never the most common reason for a brawl. Man’s real motivation to fight has always been their sense of male pride. Any self respecting male has this in abundance, it creates the urge to fight. It’s a pride that can be stung easily, and solved only in a few ways- a solid head butt, roundhouse right-hook, or at the very least an old fashioned shoeing.
Football has traditionally been the outlet for the English men to release their 'male pride'. But the Guardian reading, suburb dwelling, middle classes have driven the violence out- without justification.
There was never a problem with violence at football. Those who indulged knew the risks. Those who didn’t want to get involved didn’t have to- they were generally the aforementioned middle classed ‘men’- and could therefore afford to splash out on a corporate box or expensive seat away from the violence.
The death of violence at football has coincided with the emergence of the metro sexual man- and this is no coincidence.
Fighting is an intrinsic part of a man’s make up. And this time I don’t mean blusher or eye-liner.
Forget the gender bending eighties- that was not where the decline of manliness started. It was simply a way for men desperately seeking attention to get noticed. The 2000s has been the decade when it has become the social norm for men to act as women. Gender bending was deliberately obscure- but this is gender blending- and it marks the death of the alpha male.
The male is giving up the battle to save a long held identity all too easily, but there’s a simple reason for this. You can’t win a battle without fighting- and man’s right to fight has been removed.
Man have been fighting for as long as it has existed. Violence was often over women, food and land- but these were never the most common reason for a brawl. Man’s real motivation to fight has always been their sense of male pride. Any self respecting male has this in abundance, it creates the urge to fight. It’s a pride that can be stung easily, and solved only in a few ways- a solid head butt, roundhouse right-hook, or at the very least an old fashioned shoeing.
Football has traditionally been the outlet for the English men to release their 'male pride'. But the Guardian reading, suburb dwelling, middle classes have driven the violence out- without justification.
There was never a problem with violence at football. Those who indulged knew the risks. Those who didn’t want to get involved didn’t have to- they were generally the aforementioned middle classed ‘men’- and could therefore afford to splash out on a corporate box or expensive seat away from the violence.
The death of violence at football has coincided with the emergence of the metro sexual man- and this is no coincidence.
Fighting is an intrinsic part of a man’s make up. And this time I don’t mean blusher or eye-liner.
Women's Liberation
The Women's Liberation movement was a bad thing. It has ruined the family home, encouraged murder and given women who do not even pay attention to politics the chance to vote.
Instead of going out to work, women should stay home, raise families and tend to domestic duties. Instead, we find that women are not only not tending to their children, they are killing them.
The right to abortion that the women’s movement brought has meant that there has been a steady increase of murder through out the years.
Abortion is rising each year, and instead of bringing life into the world, women are destroying it. The Department of Health in a statistical report says that abortions have risen by nearly 1% since 2004 and is increasing each year.
Women are having abortions younger and younger and only have children in their 30’s when their career that never really began has ended. They wait until their bodies are old and used to deliver unhealthy children into the world.
The point of a woman is to keep the household in check and bring up her husbands children. World War Two may have rented the women a reason to work outside the household, but that was because the men were fighting to keep the country free for these women.
How do they repay those that lost their lives in the war? By starting their own war, by insisting that they demand ‘equality’.
In 2004, John H. Johnson examined data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and concluded that gender has an important influence on the connection between work hours and increases in the probability of divorce. Women's work hours consistently increase divorce, whereas increases in men's work hours often have no statistical effect. "I also find that the incidence in divorce is far higher in couples where both spouses are working than in couples where only one spouse is employed," Johnson says.
If a host of studies are to be believed, marrying women with careers is a bad thing. If women quit their jobs and stay home with the kids, they will be unhappy (Journal of Marriage and Family, 2003). They will be unhappy if they make more money than men do ( Social Forces, 2006). Men will be unhappy if they make more money than women do ( Journal of Marriage and Family, 2001). Men will be more likely to fall ill ( American Journal of Sociology). Even the house will be dirtier ( Institute for Social Research).
Conventionally, men have tended to do paid work outside the home, and women have tended to do the household work, including raising children.
All of the work must get done by somebody, and the previous combinations of men being the breadwinner and women looking after the house has worked well for centuries.
While women go off to work for a day, trying so hard to compete with a man for his job, her children suffer. Being brought up by strangers, the child becomes more accustomed to a spotty 16 year old girl’s face than the familiar face of the one who brought them into the world.
What is to become of our children if the women of this world selfishly give them up, to go and work fifty hours a week? A recent study in Social Forces, a research journal, found that women--even those with a "feminist" outlook--are happier when their husband is the primary breadwinner.
Women risk their children, their families and marriage all to earn ‘pocket money’ which they spend on cosmetics and clothes designed to ‘liberate’ them, instead of on the future of their children and families.
The only thing that the women’s movement did was create a divide in the family structure, one that is widening with each year as families and children have to suffer for the selfish choices of women evading their duties.
Instead of going out to work, women should stay home, raise families and tend to domestic duties. Instead, we find that women are not only not tending to their children, they are killing them.
The right to abortion that the women’s movement brought has meant that there has been a steady increase of murder through out the years.
Abortion is rising each year, and instead of bringing life into the world, women are destroying it. The Department of Health in a statistical report says that abortions have risen by nearly 1% since 2004 and is increasing each year.
Women are having abortions younger and younger and only have children in their 30’s when their career that never really began has ended. They wait until their bodies are old and used to deliver unhealthy children into the world.
The point of a woman is to keep the household in check and bring up her husbands children. World War Two may have rented the women a reason to work outside the household, but that was because the men were fighting to keep the country free for these women.
How do they repay those that lost their lives in the war? By starting their own war, by insisting that they demand ‘equality’.
In 2004, John H. Johnson examined data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and concluded that gender has an important influence on the connection between work hours and increases in the probability of divorce. Women's work hours consistently increase divorce, whereas increases in men's work hours often have no statistical effect. "I also find that the incidence in divorce is far higher in couples where both spouses are working than in couples where only one spouse is employed," Johnson says.
If a host of studies are to be believed, marrying women with careers is a bad thing. If women quit their jobs and stay home with the kids, they will be unhappy (Journal of Marriage and Family, 2003). They will be unhappy if they make more money than men do ( Social Forces, 2006). Men will be unhappy if they make more money than women do ( Journal of Marriage and Family, 2001). Men will be more likely to fall ill ( American Journal of Sociology). Even the house will be dirtier ( Institute for Social Research).
Conventionally, men have tended to do paid work outside the home, and women have tended to do the household work, including raising children.
All of the work must get done by somebody, and the previous combinations of men being the breadwinner and women looking after the house has worked well for centuries.
While women go off to work for a day, trying so hard to compete with a man for his job, her children suffer. Being brought up by strangers, the child becomes more accustomed to a spotty 16 year old girl’s face than the familiar face of the one who brought them into the world.
What is to become of our children if the women of this world selfishly give them up, to go and work fifty hours a week? A recent study in Social Forces, a research journal, found that women--even those with a "feminist" outlook--are happier when their husband is the primary breadwinner.
Women risk their children, their families and marriage all to earn ‘pocket money’ which they spend on cosmetics and clothes designed to ‘liberate’ them, instead of on the future of their children and families.
The only thing that the women’s movement did was create a divide in the family structure, one that is widening with each year as families and children have to suffer for the selfish choices of women evading their duties.
Bullying: Necessary for a Healthy Society
Hierarchy is essential for any successful society and bullying is the sure-fire, never-fail, tried and tested way to achieve this. All animals, of which we as humans are the dominant, bullying species, require a well-defined system of power.
In time-honoured tradition, prevalent since the dawn of man when the bigger chimps hit the weaker ones with club-like sticks and singed their arse hairs with the first licks of flame, the stronger elements will always rise to the top.
So a child comes home crying and, perhaps, beaten again as they are bullied into submission by the tough popular kids who are reacting to being bullied themselves at home and re-asserting their place in the world by picking on the weak. It’s a marvellously intricate and highly complex chain. Like a DNA strand comprised of big fish and little fish.
Bullied children know their place in society and will grow into the necessarily weak and scared members of adulthood that can be bullied once again in the workplace and provide the footholds and rungs that the strong, good looking and confident require to haul themselves to the top. The bully victims provide a valuable and necessary service.
A point to keep in mind - they must be made to feel slightly important as a swathe of suicides would be detrimental to the economy. However, as a qualifier to this, some suicides are necessary to weed out those who are just too weak to be utilised. These people are of use to no one.
We simply can’t have an entire group of people thinking they can achieve, succeed and prosper when they will always, always fail. Bullying helps them to realise this at an early age and stops a nation of the disappointed growing and sucking the life and vigour out of those who are, quite honestly, better people.
Without these bullying tactics we would have no system of government, corporations would crumble and the IMF would be non-existent.
Someone must think of the poor African countries. How would they know that they are inferior to white, western, capitalist civilizations without an extremely well laid out system of bullying that started with slavery and is now re-branded as economic reality?
Even communism recognised this eternal truth. Everyone is equal but some are more equal than others. Those in power were the same as those they ruled on paper, but their large palatial homes and separate lane of the motorway (got to be quick to implement draconian laws) clearly set them apart. As did the wide spread imprisonments, the rampant torture and the countless murders.
Humans feel comfortable with bullying. They positively need it. Sheep bleat in the fields with big wide eyes until the farmer and his collie come along to point out the pen that was there all the time, yet incomprehensible until the sharp whistles and vicious barks steered them in the right direction.
Too much free thought and creativity is dangerous. A healthy system of bullying helps to keep these aspects in check. With bullying rampant, everyone knows his or her place.
Alexis
In time-honoured tradition, prevalent since the dawn of man when the bigger chimps hit the weaker ones with club-like sticks and singed their arse hairs with the first licks of flame, the stronger elements will always rise to the top.
So a child comes home crying and, perhaps, beaten again as they are bullied into submission by the tough popular kids who are reacting to being bullied themselves at home and re-asserting their place in the world by picking on the weak. It’s a marvellously intricate and highly complex chain. Like a DNA strand comprised of big fish and little fish.
Bullied children know their place in society and will grow into the necessarily weak and scared members of adulthood that can be bullied once again in the workplace and provide the footholds and rungs that the strong, good looking and confident require to haul themselves to the top. The bully victims provide a valuable and necessary service.
A point to keep in mind - they must be made to feel slightly important as a swathe of suicides would be detrimental to the economy. However, as a qualifier to this, some suicides are necessary to weed out those who are just too weak to be utilised. These people are of use to no one.
We simply can’t have an entire group of people thinking they can achieve, succeed and prosper when they will always, always fail. Bullying helps them to realise this at an early age and stops a nation of the disappointed growing and sucking the life and vigour out of those who are, quite honestly, better people.
Without these bullying tactics we would have no system of government, corporations would crumble and the IMF would be non-existent.
Someone must think of the poor African countries. How would they know that they are inferior to white, western, capitalist civilizations without an extremely well laid out system of bullying that started with slavery and is now re-branded as economic reality?
Even communism recognised this eternal truth. Everyone is equal but some are more equal than others. Those in power were the same as those they ruled on paper, but their large palatial homes and separate lane of the motorway (got to be quick to implement draconian laws) clearly set them apart. As did the wide spread imprisonments, the rampant torture and the countless murders.
Humans feel comfortable with bullying. They positively need it. Sheep bleat in the fields with big wide eyes until the farmer and his collie come along to point out the pen that was there all the time, yet incomprehensible until the sharp whistles and vicious barks steered them in the right direction.
Too much free thought and creativity is dangerous. A healthy system of bullying helps to keep these aspects in check. With bullying rampant, everyone knows his or her place.
Alexis
A proposal for the radical regeneration of Burnley.
The prison system is overcrowded to the point of dysfunction, children maim and kill each other for entertainment, and sex beasts are free to whittle their days away in our playgrounds. They wait in filthy expectation, playing on the swings, lurking on roundabouts, their groping hands twitching to get hold of an innocent young child.
Our beautiful nation is sinking into a deviant snake pit of sin. A veritable oasis for Sodom and Gomorrah, as they scour the populated world looking for the corruptible. And what are we doing about it? Nothing. Blair and his sandal-wearing cronies sit about and moan that’s all they do, moan about the environment, about lower taxes and higher wages, about how hard it is to run a country. Well Mr Blair, there is a solution.
We must relocate the worst elements of our society, starting with the sex beasts. Get them away from the good and the honest of our land. Let them groom and fiddle amongst themselves. Where can they be sent? It has to be a place that is already overrun with evil and vice, with the worst sorts of human behavior occurring in every office and every home. A place so defiled by malevolence that it could get no worse.
Burnley, as described by the official tourism website, is an ‘enigma’. If this is true it is not because it straddles the line between the golden age of industry, and the consumer supported comfort of the Twenty First century, no, rather it is because of its status as an indefinable wasteland, straddling the line between Hell and Hades. One possible solution to the problem of Burnley is to have it, and its population relocated 20 miles off the coast of Blackpool. Desirable as this sounds, it is simply not feasible, it would be time consuming, and would risk contaminating our costal waters for centuries.
As residents flee, the crumbling streets and boarded up factories are beginning to resemble a ghost town. The bodies of the old and infirmed lie strewn across the cracked cobbled roads, children are left behind, abandoned to make a life amongst the rubble. It is in this picture that the solution to our nations problems can be found. Why should these children crawl, blinded by coal dust, and choked by asbestos in search of a better life? Why not send the sex beasts to Burnley, let them have the place, and put the children in the vacated playgrounds?
The BNP have been angling for a controlling stake in the city for years. Well let them have it. They could run the city and, using the infamously violent Burnley Suicide Squad as their enforcers, could restore some order amongst the nonce’s. Our prisons would empty out over night, leaving more space for all the terrorists and chancing rag heads who have flooded our nation. Our playgrounds would be safe again, and our nation would be one step closer to restoring purity.
ed.
The prison system is overcrowded to the point of dysfunction, children maim and kill each other for entertainment, and sex beasts are free to whittle their days away in our playgrounds. They wait in filthy expectation, playing on the swings, lurking on roundabouts, their groping hands twitching to get hold of an innocent young child.
Our beautiful nation is sinking into a deviant snake pit of sin. A veritable oasis for Sodom and Gomorrah, as they scour the populated world looking for the corruptible. And what are we doing about it? Nothing. Blair and his sandal-wearing cronies sit about and moan that’s all they do, moan about the environment, about lower taxes and higher wages, about how hard it is to run a country. Well Mr Blair, there is a solution.
We must relocate the worst elements of our society, starting with the sex beasts. Get them away from the good and the honest of our land. Let them groom and fiddle amongst themselves. Where can they be sent? It has to be a place that is already overrun with evil and vice, with the worst sorts of human behavior occurring in every office and every home. A place so defiled by malevolence that it could get no worse.
Burnley, as described by the official tourism website, is an ‘enigma’. If this is true it is not because it straddles the line between the golden age of industry, and the consumer supported comfort of the Twenty First century, no, rather it is because of its status as an indefinable wasteland, straddling the line between Hell and Hades. One possible solution to the problem of Burnley is to have it, and its population relocated 20 miles off the coast of Blackpool. Desirable as this sounds, it is simply not feasible, it would be time consuming, and would risk contaminating our costal waters for centuries.
As residents flee, the crumbling streets and boarded up factories are beginning to resemble a ghost town. The bodies of the old and infirmed lie strewn across the cracked cobbled roads, children are left behind, abandoned to make a life amongst the rubble. It is in this picture that the solution to our nations problems can be found. Why should these children crawl, blinded by coal dust, and choked by asbestos in search of a better life? Why not send the sex beasts to Burnley, let them have the place, and put the children in the vacated playgrounds?
The BNP have been angling for a controlling stake in the city for years. Well let them have it. They could run the city and, using the infamously violent Burnley Suicide Squad as their enforcers, could restore some order amongst the nonce’s. Our prisons would empty out over night, leaving more space for all the terrorists and chancing rag heads who have flooded our nation. Our playgrounds would be safe again, and our nation would be one step closer to restoring purity.
ed.
The Russian Mafia - Shining Light of Eastern Capitalism
As surely as snow will fall on the minarets of Russia’s Red Square, the positive influence on the country’s mafia will be felt on the eastern superpower’s fledgling economy.
How can the mafia act as a positive force? Why would a group associated with organised crime work for the good of the Russian people, who have been victims of politician’s power struggles for so many years.
The answer lies in the mafia’s history as a strong force for capitalism in the former eastern block states. It has worked tirelessly and often with little thanks as the West’s PR man in offering a shinning example of the power of the dollar and the American dream within this communist ravaged nation.
Russia’s masses need look no further for examples of self made men, than the reclusive mafia bosses. No press call is needed for Donald Trump to proclaim his Midas touch on the streets of Moscow, for beneath the outward veneer of eastern communism a vibrant economy was always thriving.
Mafia activity has a long history in Russia, it preceeded the country’s dalliance with communism in the twentieth century and moved with the country as it took it’s fledgling steps into the West’s capitalist playground.
Through this change the Mafia has consistently worked to promote the ethos of free trade, choice and availability of goods to the repressed Russian people.
Under the communist regime of the 1970s and 1980s, the Mafia ran a thriving business line in supplying Russian citizens with black-market western goods. Who can blame the normal Russian man or woman - unfairly repressed by the shackles of communism – for wanting to enjoy a Coca Cola like every other free man in the democratic nations of the world. And who can blame the entrepreneurial mafia man for meeting this customer demand.
Without the mafia, who would have stood up to the communist powers in enlightening the common Russian man as to the delights of a free and democratic society? The tireless work of these organisations, often in the face of great personal risk, to supply western goods to the Russian people during this period cannot be overlooked. Indeed, it may well have sown the seed of change needed to spur the common Russian towards revolution.
After the fall of the communist regime, the mafia organisations, already strongly immersed in the strategies of western capitalism were ideally placed to foster the notion of free trade within the fledgling economy.
The mafia is also providing a day-to-day means of employment for many Russians. Western businesses now operating in Russia employ large security entourages to protect their executives. 25,000 Russian security firms have grown up to protect these Westerners and the organisations employ between 600,000-800,000 Russian workers. It is estimated that the mafia controls a sixth of this thriving sector, which provides a valuable service to western companies and keeps many Russian’s in jobs.
It is often argued that the Russian mafia is an unsavoury organisation because of its secrecy and un-flamboyant manner. But surely, the Russian mafia have done nothing more than mirror their western friends, more fully schooled in the arts of global capitalism.
Find a CEO of a European investment bank who does not consider secrecy in financial business to be a core skill and you will find an unsuccessful banker. You will also rarely find these bankers boasting of their flamboyant natures.
The other main argument used against the mafia is that they resort to crime and violence to achieve their business ends. And in this area, they may even be able to teach their new western comrades a thing or two about effective business strategy.
Be ruthless in attaining your goal and success will follow! Surely any businessman worth his Armani suit will tell you this. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. And if your enemies need to be silenced, surely it is more humane to quickly remove them with an effective poison than hold them for many years on remote Cuban islands. This all costs money after all, which is not good business sense at all.
As the world’s governments struggle to decide on Russia’s place within the new global world economy, they should perhaps look to the mafia as an old and shining example of capitalism within this eastern state. They may find that the thinking of the east and west are not so far apart after all.
How can the mafia act as a positive force? Why would a group associated with organised crime work for the good of the Russian people, who have been victims of politician’s power struggles for so many years.
The answer lies in the mafia’s history as a strong force for capitalism in the former eastern block states. It has worked tirelessly and often with little thanks as the West’s PR man in offering a shinning example of the power of the dollar and the American dream within this communist ravaged nation.
Russia’s masses need look no further for examples of self made men, than the reclusive mafia bosses. No press call is needed for Donald Trump to proclaim his Midas touch on the streets of Moscow, for beneath the outward veneer of eastern communism a vibrant economy was always thriving.
Mafia activity has a long history in Russia, it preceeded the country’s dalliance with communism in the twentieth century and moved with the country as it took it’s fledgling steps into the West’s capitalist playground.
Through this change the Mafia has consistently worked to promote the ethos of free trade, choice and availability of goods to the repressed Russian people.
Under the communist regime of the 1970s and 1980s, the Mafia ran a thriving business line in supplying Russian citizens with black-market western goods. Who can blame the normal Russian man or woman - unfairly repressed by the shackles of communism – for wanting to enjoy a Coca Cola like every other free man in the democratic nations of the world. And who can blame the entrepreneurial mafia man for meeting this customer demand.
Without the mafia, who would have stood up to the communist powers in enlightening the common Russian man as to the delights of a free and democratic society? The tireless work of these organisations, often in the face of great personal risk, to supply western goods to the Russian people during this period cannot be overlooked. Indeed, it may well have sown the seed of change needed to spur the common Russian towards revolution.
After the fall of the communist regime, the mafia organisations, already strongly immersed in the strategies of western capitalism were ideally placed to foster the notion of free trade within the fledgling economy.
The mafia is also providing a day-to-day means of employment for many Russians. Western businesses now operating in Russia employ large security entourages to protect their executives. 25,000 Russian security firms have grown up to protect these Westerners and the organisations employ between 600,000-800,000 Russian workers. It is estimated that the mafia controls a sixth of this thriving sector, which provides a valuable service to western companies and keeps many Russian’s in jobs.
It is often argued that the Russian mafia is an unsavoury organisation because of its secrecy and un-flamboyant manner. But surely, the Russian mafia have done nothing more than mirror their western friends, more fully schooled in the arts of global capitalism.
Find a CEO of a European investment bank who does not consider secrecy in financial business to be a core skill and you will find an unsuccessful banker. You will also rarely find these bankers boasting of their flamboyant natures.
The other main argument used against the mafia is that they resort to crime and violence to achieve their business ends. And in this area, they may even be able to teach their new western comrades a thing or two about effective business strategy.
Be ruthless in attaining your goal and success will follow! Surely any businessman worth his Armani suit will tell you this. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. And if your enemies need to be silenced, surely it is more humane to quickly remove them with an effective poison than hold them for many years on remote Cuban islands. This all costs money after all, which is not good business sense at all.
As the world’s governments struggle to decide on Russia’s place within the new global world economy, they should perhaps look to the mafia as an old and shining example of capitalism within this eastern state. They may find that the thinking of the east and west are not so far apart after all.
‘Gun Control' by a middle-aged fascist.
The next time I hear some tree-hugging, lentil-chewing liberal regurgitate that pathetic old line “if we didn’t have guns we wouldn’t kill each other” I’m going to get my rifle out and shoot them at point blank range.
Human beings kill one another. Human beings torture one another. Human beings do unspeakable things and have been doing since the beginning of time. This is exactly why I need a gun.
When some hooded, nike-clad, wannabe-gangster, Asbo kid - off his face on smack no doubt - breaks into my house looking to steal my DVD player, property that I’ve worked all my life to save up for, and ready to assault my wife and children for the sake of fifty quid for his next hit, the only thing that’s going to deter him is a rifle pointed squarely at his face.
John Lott, in his esteemed work ‘More Guns, Less Crime’ points out the positive correlation between lily-livered gun control legislation and an increase in crimes whereby violent criminals victimise law-abiding citizens.
These thugs are absolutely delighted when the bleeding-heart liberals of this country get together and make up stupendous rules to stop honest citizens protecting their families by keeping guns in their houses.
They know exactly where to get their guns on the black market, most of them are members of violent gangs, and the only thing that’s going to stop them breaking into our homes and attacking our women and children is if they think there’s a risk that they’ll be met with a bullet in the head.
What the government doesn’t seem to understand is that they only exist to do the things we can’t do ourselves. I can’t organise a national health service, I can’t build my own school. What I can do is protect my home and family by keeping a gun loaded and ready to shoot anyone who with the audacity to think they’re going to get away with breaking into my home.
I don’t need the police to do this, which is a good job - the blundering, incompetent fools that they are. I’ll be damned if I’m going to stand around unarmed waiting for some twenty-year-old in a police uniform to come and protect my home. The metropolitan police are shockingly incapable of crime prevention, I could barely trust them to find my house never find protect it.
Any sane person would never willingly hand over such a grave responsibility as protecting their own home to a bunch of floundering imbeciles such as the metropolitan police. Indeed, when did we agree that it was their responsibility? Does anyone remember signing that contract?
The sheer arrogance of this government’s belief that it can strip us of our basic human right to protect ourselves, as if they are some all-knowing parent who can’t trust us to look after ourselves, is astounding. Where do they get off deciding who can have a gun and who can’t? Police? Yes. Army? Of course. Honest, hard-working family man wishing to protect his family? No no no.
I refuse to be bullied by this nanny state any longer. The government does not know better, it knows much much worse - you only have to look at the papers to see that the streets are teeming with rapists, paedophiles, muggers, gangsters and drug-dealers, and then they tell us just to sit tight, behave ourselves and they’ll sort it out for us.
Well I’ve been alive for fifty years now, and they havn’t sorted it out. And, sorry if this upsets your laughably naïve outlook on life, but they’re not going to.
So it’s up to you. Pretend that the state will protect you if you like, but I know what I’m going to do. And I sincerely believe that I’ll be having the last laugh, quite sure in fact, since I’ll be the one shooting hoodlums and you’ll be the one getting beaten up and robbed.
The next time I hear some tree-hugging, lentil-chewing liberal regurgitate that pathetic old line “if we didn’t have guns we wouldn’t kill each other” I’m going to get my rifle out and shoot them at point blank range.
Human beings kill one another. Human beings torture one another. Human beings do unspeakable things and have been doing since the beginning of time. This is exactly why I need a gun.
When some hooded, nike-clad, wannabe-gangster, Asbo kid - off his face on smack no doubt - breaks into my house looking to steal my DVD player, property that I’ve worked all my life to save up for, and ready to assault my wife and children for the sake of fifty quid for his next hit, the only thing that’s going to deter him is a rifle pointed squarely at his face.
John Lott, in his esteemed work ‘More Guns, Less Crime’ points out the positive correlation between lily-livered gun control legislation and an increase in crimes whereby violent criminals victimise law-abiding citizens.
These thugs are absolutely delighted when the bleeding-heart liberals of this country get together and make up stupendous rules to stop honest citizens protecting their families by keeping guns in their houses.
They know exactly where to get their guns on the black market, most of them are members of violent gangs, and the only thing that’s going to stop them breaking into our homes and attacking our women and children is if they think there’s a risk that they’ll be met with a bullet in the head.
What the government doesn’t seem to understand is that they only exist to do the things we can’t do ourselves. I can’t organise a national health service, I can’t build my own school. What I can do is protect my home and family by keeping a gun loaded and ready to shoot anyone who with the audacity to think they’re going to get away with breaking into my home.
I don’t need the police to do this, which is a good job - the blundering, incompetent fools that they are. I’ll be damned if I’m going to stand around unarmed waiting for some twenty-year-old in a police uniform to come and protect my home. The metropolitan police are shockingly incapable of crime prevention, I could barely trust them to find my house never find protect it.
Any sane person would never willingly hand over such a grave responsibility as protecting their own home to a bunch of floundering imbeciles such as the metropolitan police. Indeed, when did we agree that it was their responsibility? Does anyone remember signing that contract?
The sheer arrogance of this government’s belief that it can strip us of our basic human right to protect ourselves, as if they are some all-knowing parent who can’t trust us to look after ourselves, is astounding. Where do they get off deciding who can have a gun and who can’t? Police? Yes. Army? Of course. Honest, hard-working family man wishing to protect his family? No no no.
I refuse to be bullied by this nanny state any longer. The government does not know better, it knows much much worse - you only have to look at the papers to see that the streets are teeming with rapists, paedophiles, muggers, gangsters and drug-dealers, and then they tell us just to sit tight, behave ourselves and they’ll sort it out for us.
Well I’ve been alive for fifty years now, and they havn’t sorted it out. And, sorry if this upsets your laughably naïve outlook on life, but they’re not going to.
So it’s up to you. Pretend that the state will protect you if you like, but I know what I’m going to do. And I sincerely believe that I’ll be having the last laugh, quite sure in fact, since I’ll be the one shooting hoodlums and you’ll be the one getting beaten up and robbed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)