Exchanging the Illusion of Security for Liberty

Start off with Denninger from Saturday.

Several things bother me about the Marathon bombing.  First, these were Muslims who had left a digital trail of association with radicals.  It's a free country with free association endorsed in the Constitution (of course, the right to keep and bear arms is also endorsed there), but, if we advocate violence, support and associate with people advocating violence -- especially the violent overthrow of the United States government, we should expect to be watched a little closer than Grandma who posts pictures of sleeping cats.

Second, I do not like the sealing off and shutting down of an entire urban area in the search for one person.  This is what our military does in Afghanistan and Iraq.  This is exactly the kind of action that caused problems in Boston and its environs 240 years ago.  And it was completely ineffective.  What would have been much more effective would have been to simply shift some uniformed patrols into the Watertown area, station some officers around strategic intersections, bridges and exit points, to have Officer Friendly out walking around and talking to the residents, reminding them to be on the alert because the perp was last seen in their area, probably wounded -- they had seen the blood trail, armed and dangerous.  How do I know that would have been more effective?  Because that is exactly how the perpetrator was located.  Some citizen noticed something amiss, checked it out, and called it in.  This happens all the time.

Terrorists are not superhuman any more than an ordinary criminal.  They are subhuman in their disregard for the pain, death and suffering they are willing to visit upon their fellow citizens.  They lack the basic moral restraints that govern most of us, but they have to breathe, move, eat, sleep, and eliminate just like the rest of us.  They are vulnerable to weapons -- no kryptonite or super-secret ninja plasma swords are needed.  A plain old .30 caliber 168-grain or 180-grain .40 caliber projectile or an ounce of buckshot will generally get the job done.  If someone like this were loose in our area, we would check our locks and keep our firearms and cellphones within easy reach. 

Criminals cleverly escape from prisons every so often.  They are sometimes murderers and other desperate and dangerous types.  They may well, like terrorists, look to go out in a blaze of glory -- "Top of the world, Ma" goes way back.  We don't call out the National Guard for a couple of prison escapees.  We let the citizens know what's going on, increase patrol activity, and station people at choke points.  It generally works.  If one shot-up kid caused this much havoc, what would these tricked-out Fifes do if they had to deal with Bonnie and Clyde, Dillinger, or Charles Arthur Floyd?  What are they going to do as gangs and drug cartels increase their presence in American cities?  What are they doing now in the face of daily violence and death in urban centers?

It is risible that the Boston police were shocked to learn that the bombers did not have permits to carry their firearms.  What is the world coming to?  I mean, if you can't trust mad bombers to play by the rules, who can you trust?

I think, though, it all comes down to what Eratosthenes says ( as quoted in part last week in the sidelines at AD):  

So, tentative conclusion: We are experiencing a conflict of cultures: The ready versus the unready. One guy has a metal lunchbox with an industrial-grade construction workers’ thermos, just in case, in his huge truck that has four-wheel drive, just in case, with a pack of road flares and a winch and a set of jumper cables, just in case. And bottled water and energy bars and candles and dry matches AND a gun. The other guy is out walking, without packing anything at all, relying on his next kiosk-encounter for the next dose of hand-sanitizer, doggy poop bag, wet wipe, iPod recharge and energy drink.

So yes, it is more about control than about the guns. But a lot of the gun-control advocates will protest that they have no designs on controlling anyone, be they friends, foes or complete strangers. And they’ll be right about that. Their cause is one of: I am not ready, and I don’t want that other guy to be ready either.

In other words, the rest of the world does not like prudence, wisdom or foresight, strength or competence because it makes them feel foolish and inadequate.  This goes to my complaint about unions being mainly for people who don't like to work and probably aren't very good at their jobs.  If you are good at what you do, a union just gets in your way because whoever is paying you to do it can't bring you up without bringing along the rest of the barely-functional. 

And all those cops in Boston were getting time-and-a-half.  No wonder they couldn't find the bomber.