Enough: Time to Do Something About Guns
- Print print this page
- Discuss 64 comments, Blog about
Advertisement
By barbara mcallisTER
Special to The Pilot
On Sunday, Dec. 16, I watched TV coverage of one of the most horrifying shootings in our nation's history.
One week later, I read an opinion piece in The Pilot in which Robert Levy attempted to convince us that no legal remedy is needed to what has become an epidemic in our society.
Instead, Mr. Levy talked about antibiotics and viruses, and offered his diagnosis of Adam Lanza as a "depraved narcissist."
He stated: "If Newtown has spurred us to any action, it should be a professional search for the root cause and cure for a worldwide public mental health problem." He offered no support for legislation that would strengthen regulations relating to the sale of weapons. Instead, he talked about the right to bear arms.
Certainly Adam Lanza had the right to bear arms, as did his mother, who purchased a .223-caliber Bushmaster rifle and two pistols (a Glock and a Sig Sauer) and apparently taught her son to fire them efficiently - well enough to kill 20 young children in less than 10 minutes.
Last year, 32,000 Ameri-cans died from gunshot wounds; 11,000 of those deaths were homicides - a rate 12 times the average of other civilized countries. Other countries do experience mass shootings despite strict gun control laws.
Levy cites a 1996 school shooting in the United Kingdom as evidence that gun control does not work - but fails to mention that there are only about 50 homicides every year in England and Wales. The U.S. rate is 30 times the rate in France and Australia.
Of course, Levy does not believe these low homicide rates are due to the limited number of guns available in other countries. He believes, instead, that we cannot "stop school shootings by disarming everyone in hopes that a murderer will be disarmed too." Sensible gun regulation does not demand that an individual's right to bear arms be denied, but it does require the recognition that gun ownership carries enormous responsibilities.
Laws should require thorough background checks for every firearm that is sold (or gifted), whether at a gun show, in a gun shop, or between private parties. Laws should regulate the size of clips that can be manufactured for semi-automatic weapons. Assault weapons should be banned for purchase by any private citizen.
And gun ownership should require at least the same degree of training necessary for anyone wishing to drive an automobile. None of these requirements would affect Mr. Levy's - or any qualified American's - ability to buy a gun for hunting, sport shooting or home protection.
But now we are told by Levy and others that mental health is the issue, or that pop culture is to blame. The truth is there will always be disturbed people. But such people are not just in America. They exist all over the world, in many countries with significantly lower shooting deaths. And they exist even where mental health support is available.
For example, Robert Stewart sought help from a mental health treatment center in Robbins on the Friday before he used a .357 caliber handgun, a .22 Magnum semi-automatic pistol, and a 12-gauge shotgun to kill seven elderly residents and a nurse at Pinelake Health and Rehab in Carthage the following Sunday.
And there are people all over the world who are influenced by the violence that is often part of modern popular culture. For example, the Japanese are on the cutting edge of video games, but their gun homicide rate is close to zero. Perhaps it's because they have the tightest gun laws in the industrialized world.
I was a teacher for 38 years, and I am a mother. As I watched reports from Newtown and listened to the anguished sobs of parents whose children had been killed, I thought about the kids I taught - and my own grandchildren. I thought about their right to live, their right to grow and learn, and their right to be all they can be - rights denied the children of Newtown by a troubled young man who had a right to carry the weapons he used.
I must admit that Adam Lanza's right to bear arms never entered my head. Instead, I thought: "This is enough."
Barbara McAllister is a retired teacher living in Southern Pines.
More like this story
Advertisement














Comments
Courseaire 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Words have killed more people than guns. We should also do away with the 1st Amendment.
bubbasmith 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Restricting firearms sales to honest, law abiding American citizens will do little to prevent violence and much to undermine the core values of a free society.
geoffcutler 4 months, 3 weeks ago
If every liberal calling for stricter gun control measures would give equal time to cultural and mental health issues, making the conversation one that takes into account all possibilities for what causes a Newtown, it sure would make for a more intellectually honest and legitimate debate.
Noluv4thugs 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Religion has and will continue to cause more deaths over BS than any other idea this world has ever seen. Shouldn't we be talking about making religious dogma illegal too? Only seems fair...
PS I don't really believe we should make religion illegal. Just trying to prove a point
Courseaire 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Noluvthugs - You have it backwards. It's not the religion that causes deaths; it's the people with religion that cause death. Religion is just a tool and the religious people should be made illegal.
Noluv4thugs 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Hahahaha nice Courseaire!!
AFCHIEF 4 months, 3 weeks ago
On Sunday December 17, 2012, 2 days after the CT shooting, a man went to a restaurant in San Antonio to kill his X-girlfriend. After he shot her, most of the people in the restaurant fled next door to a theater. The gunman followed them and entered the theater so he could shoot more people. He started shooting and people in the theater started running and screaming. It’s like the Aurora, CO theater story plus a restaurant!
Now aren’t you wondering why this isn’t a lead story in the national media along with the school shooting?
There was an off duty county deputy at the theater. SHE pulled out her gun and shot the man 4 times before he had a chance to kill anyone. So since this story makes the point that the best thing to stop a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun, the media is treating it like it never happened.
Only the local media covered it. The city is giving her a medal next week. Just thought you’d like to know.
teufelhunden 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Geoff-well stated. WHODATHUNKIT?
AFCHIEF 4 months, 3 weeks ago
How about enforcing a Nation Wide death penalty that actually works. Just imagine the national savings on taxes we would have.
skylinefirepest 4 months, 3 weeks ago
The man who killed two firemen last week was out of prison...why was he in prison in the first place? Because he killed his grandmother with a hammer...when you bleeding heart liberals want to stop blaming firearms and keep killers in jail FOR LIFE then maybe we can discuss solutions. Guns are not the problem Mrs. McAllister, as today almost three hundred million guns owned in the United States did not hurt anyone at all. People are the problem, the gun is just a tool and banning the law abiding from owning guns ( or a single "style" of gun ) will not solve the problem. Obama wants guns banned and will very willingly go along with whatever bullhockey his committee comes up with...that's called FEELGOOD legislation...otherwise useless.
fugitiveguy 4 months, 3 weeks ago
"Now aren’t you wondering why this isn’t a lead story in the national media along with the school shooting?"
Hadn't heard a peep about this and I am a news junkie. I guess "gun ends/prevents carnage" isn't consistant with the narrative. The deputy does deserve a medal. I bet even the liberal politicians will try to get their mugs in the photo.
fugitiveguy 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Someone who kills anyone with a hammer should never see the light of day, killing grandma with the hammer are you kidding me. What idiot thought releasing this animal was a good idea? Probably a team of do gooders applied pressure to win him his freedom.
FedUp2 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Adam Lanza was 20 years old. According to CT law he did not have the right to carry a firearm.
FedUp2 4 months, 3 weeks ago
It amazes me how many young people are killed in car wrecks. It's on the local news almost daily. I don't hear a public outcry to get rid of automobiles. National statistics show there are far more deaths from traffic accidents than firearms. Let's use a little common sense and focus on what causes people to become violent rather than jump on the bandwagon to outlaw or restrict guns.
packwilleat 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Fugitiveguy ~ start following http://drudgereport.com/ you'll see all the stories the mainstream media refuses to publish.
fugitiveguy 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Its stunning how may people think outlawing guns will actually make them safer. I think I read that over 500 people were gunned down in Chicago last year and I understand they have very strict gun laws.
packwilleat 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Yup. Good thing Chicago is a gun free zone.
http://www.blacklistednews.com/Merry_Christmas_and_Happy_Gun_Control,_Chicago/23334/0/38/38/Y/M.html
Thatcher 4 months, 3 weeks ago
pack and fugitiveguy-- Chicago could solve this gun violence problem once and for all, if only they took bold leadership: pass a law requiring all rival gang members to try and get along. Or pass a law requiring all gang members to obey all existing gun laws, even the laws with which they may disagree. Problem solved. Cheers!
pinewoodnc 4 months, 3 weeks ago
You have to go through driver's training, take a written and driving test to drive a vehicle (which can be a deadly weapon), you have to take months of training and log many hours to get a pilot's license, but people can go to a gun show and buy a gun. No training needed. A deadly weapon but easy to obtain and use. I also would love someone to explain to me why anyone (besides military and police) need the high powered military style guns. I can understand hunting rifles for use by hunters and small handguns for protection, but who needs an AK47 or these other high powered weapons. I think many want these guns simply for ego reasons. No one can convince me that there is any reason for these type of guns being available to the general public.
fugitiveguy 4 months, 3 weeks ago
The debt goes higher and higher, Obama and the Dems actively make it worse, as if he wants the country to financially implode. As this progresses look for more and more people to purchase arms. The writing is on the wall.
packwilleat 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Ballooning debt, immigration reform, and gun control........ yippee!!!!
http://m.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-quickly-go-immigration-reform-and-gun-control_693547.html
skylinefirepest 4 months, 3 weeks ago
PInewood..."no one can convince me"...so why try?? These are NOT high powered rifles, girl. They are medium powered, quite a bit less than your average semi-auto hunting rifle. Would training have made any difference to the monster that killed those kids?? What would training do to lessen deaths with firearms as the tool?? And as I've already said...gun control would not have stopped this crime...banning your military "style" rifles would not have stopped this crime. In fact why is the left talking about banning a whole series of sporting rifles at all?? Is it because they have no other answer?? Why is the loony left targeting guns when the real cause of this attack was something else? Why do we protest like crazy about having teachers armed or having armed policemen to protect these kids when a percentage of these teachers already have concealed carry permits?? Why do all these assaults happen in gun free zones? About one third of all Americans own guns so we're not talking about some "passing fad" here. The latest informed guess that I've heard is that Americans own some three hundred million firearms and only a miniscule piece of a percentage point are ever used in crimes of any sort. I'm sick and tired of hearing about banning these firearms that are owned by millions of Americans simply because the LOOK different. What is the reasoning behind that, Pinewood?? Oldpilot has already pretty much admitted that he is going to lie about them to get his way...is this the fight we're going to have?
Middleman522 4 months, 3 weeks ago
As long as government idiots like we have in DC control armies and police departments, while buying votes with our money to stay in office, so they can slam more controls down our throats, I will not register my guns or give them up. Oblaima is going to give amnesty to illegals so that he can control policy in this country for 20 years, and he will come after our guns. Remember his comment about Americans clinging to their guns and religion? Those are 2 things he CAN'T CONTROL and he hates them! He controls Student loans, health insurance, energy, unions, banking(Dodd/Frank) auto production, most of the media, ect. If he walks like a punk, talks like a punk, and smirks like a punk, he's probably a punk and I need a gun! Does anyone want the Pinehurst, Whispering Pines or Aberdeen police departments coming to your home to collect guns??? Until we control our mental illness problem and liberal justice system, Americans will need to protect themselves from released crooks and free crazies, as well as control freaks in government!
packwilleat 4 months, 3 weeks ago
"Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he,then,be trusted with the government of others? Or have we found angels in the form of kings to govern him? Let history answer this question."
--Thomas Jefferson: 1st Inaugural,1801
History has answered this question time and time again. Yet some are destined to repeat it.
http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/03/10/08/dorothy.htm
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
As long as government idiots like we have in DC control armies and police departments, while buying votes with our money to stay in office, so they can slam more controls down our throats, I will not register my guns or give them up.
So I was right. You want your guns so you can kill soldiers and cops.
justpassingby2 4 months, 3 weeks ago
How about Mexicans dusty? Is it still okay to shoot Mexicans dusty?
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvkKd572vCw.
But keep banging that drum, nutball.
Yukonjohn 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Until we control our mental illness problem and liberal justice system, Americans will need to protect themselves from released crooks and free crazies, as well as control freaks in government!
DR, I think this is who middleman52 was referring to.
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
But it isn't vaguely defined "control freaks in government" that'll be taking the bullets. It'll be cops and soldiers.
So tell me, Yukon, middleman: Under what circumstances will you deem it okay to kill policemen and soldiers? Please define the precise circumstance under which you would draw down on a police officer and pull the trigger. If they stop your car for what you personally consider an unjust reason? If they're executing a warrant you personally do not feel is adequately supported by probable cause? At what exact point does a cop become an instrument of tyranny, and thus a fair target for killing under the Second Amendment, in your view?
justpassingby2 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Keep avoiding the question dusty. And you wonder why you are the 'village idiot'! So dusty when is it okay for hundreds of Mexicans to be killed by assault rifles our government allowed to be bought illegally?
Yukonjohn 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Dusty, God forbid that the day you talk about will ever come. It is hard to answer that. I have to feel that we will all know if that time comes. We will be at war with ourselves. None of us were here during the only war between Americans, but hopefully we have all read accounts written by our relatives or others. They knew when that time had come to actually fire on another American. Dusty, I was in the mililtary for ten years, and l do not know what it would have taken to get me to fire on other Americans....even though l took "obey the orders given you by your superiors" seriously.
Dusty, do you believe that the founders felt that OUR govt could become tyranical? I absolutely believe it. Maybe they were farther-seeing than we have given them credit for in our over 200yrs. Our country is at the worse impass and divide l have seen im my lifetime. I feel maybe it is divided as badly as it was before the Revolution.
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Keep avoiding the question dusty.
I'm not avoiding the question, you stupid little twit. I'm mocking it because it's ridiculous and irrelevant, just like you. It has nothing to do with the topic at hand, it assumes facts not in evidence, and it is basically just an attempt to derail and sidetrack the conversation on gun control.
This is justpissingboy's MO: ask a clown question, then throw a multi-thread tantrum because I won't let him drag the entire thread into the debate he's obsessed with, then hoot and dance like a crack-addled monkey because he thinks he's made a point.
by dustyrhoades
"I DEMAND WE DISCUSS FAST AND FURIOUS! FAST AND FURIOUS, YOU HEAR ME! FAST AND FURIOUS! FAAAAAAAAST AND FUUUURIOOOOOOUS!"
justpassingby2 4 months, 3 weeks ago
I think you could be the perfect person for Al-Jazeera America dusty. Nobody can not think for themselves any better than you. Has anybody said 'baaaaaa' in as many posts in as many different ways than you? And your childish little tantrums would be even more entertaining when people could actually see you foaming at the mouth while making fun of someone's mom!
emb6683 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Here's some nostalgia for you.
by emb6683
coffecreme 4 months, 3 weeks ago
No need to ban the guns.... just the gun owners.
emb6683 4 months, 3 weeks ago
And some more.
by emb6683
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Dusty, do you believe that the founders felt that OUR govt could become tyranical?
Sure. That's why they built a system of checks and balances. But there are too many people way too willing to go straight for the bullets when the checks and balances mean they don't get their way. Remember "if ballots don't work bullets will?" The rhetoric of the pro-gun forces seems to pre-suppose violent revolution is imminent and that losing an election makes them the equivalent of the WOLVERINES! in "Red Dawn".
justpassingby2 4 months, 3 weeks ago
I am not trying to discuss Fast and Furious. I have said that many times now. I want to know why nobody cared about assault rifles until now? Only the village idiot wouldn't have used Fast and Furious to MAKE their case against assault rifles. I am not trying to change the debate. I (thanks to you dusty, as usual) have proven a point. You have no credibility and only think what you are told to think. Whether its the wars, tax breaks, human rights, big oil, gasoline prices, jobs, lying or assault rifles, you only parrot the prevailing opinion of the party. Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
I want to know why nobody cared about assault rifles until now?
Your question is based on a false premise. That's why it's ridiculous, As are you.
Thatcher 4 months, 3 weeks ago
I think liberal arguments which include "Baaaaaaaaaaaaa" are the most effective arguments known to man. After all, who would ever try to argue with a sheep? Or depending on the punctuation, a lamb? Or perhaps a new-born goat? When faced with this liberal argument, you should "Stop, Drop, and Roll." Safety first. Cheers!
bufordsplay 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Someday we will know the truth about Fast and furious and it is my guess that it will show that Obama and Holder are guilty of conspiracy to commit mass murder. Over 300 Mexican civilians have been murdered by weapons from the program. By the way, how do you run a "weapons tracking" program without putting tracking devices on the weapons?
packwilleat 4 months, 3 weeks ago
There goes Dusty again. The paid douchebag for the Pilot. They gotta be paying better than the income of J.D. Nixx.
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
packwilleat 12 hours, 3 minutes ago There goes Dusty again. The paid douchebag for the Pilot. They gotta be paying better than the income of J.D. Nixx.
There goes packwilleat again., The ridiculous fraud who takes money from the government he says is tyranny and sucks at the taxpayer teat while decrying taxation as theft. The cowardly little bitch who's afraid to reveal his "Secret Identity" because he might lose the taxpayer funded job.
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Someday we will know the truth about Fast and furious and it is my guess that it will show that Obama and Holder are guilty of conspiracy to commit mass murder.
You keep clinging to that fantasy if it gets you through the night. But that's all it is. A fantasy. And it just goes to show how hateful and deranged the wingnuts really are.
packwilleat 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Dusty~ no one can claim F&F is some kinda made up fantasy by the wingnuts, unless you are paid by the Pilot to spread misinformation and lies. Your attacks are getting baseless and tiresome. We haven't seen any cartoon videos in awhile, go back to that for a bit.
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Really gripes your ass that I get paid for writing, doesn't it, pack? I mean, you do keep bringing it up.
Jealousy is an ugly thing, pack.
Middleman522 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Dusty you need to read the 2nd to see just why it is there. Do any actual facts mean anything to you? BTW Do you think those German people wish they had not given up their guns when the Progressive Hitler turned on them. And you will say don't bring Hitler up. History has no effect on liberals because all of their ideas are fantacy. You remember the "Blue Dress" and how wrong you were??
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
And there's the inevitable hysterical Hitler reference. Seems Godwin's Law is still valid.
Unfortunately, the myth of "Hitler took all the guns" is not:
But in the interest of History, and its accuracy, it needs to be remembered that Hitler did not take everyone's guns away, and that "gun control" for reliable Aryan-types was actually fairly relaxed. In 1928, before Hitler came to power, a Reich Law was enacted to regulate guns. Dealers needed a license. And in order to buy ammunition and own and register a gun, one needed a certificate. Then, as soon as Hitler became chancellor on January 30, 1933, Nazi party police did indeed start seizing guns from all those deemed enemies of the state. That included communists, socialists and Jews; and five years later, Jewish citizenship was revoked altogether. More, on June 12, 1933, an executive order banned the importation of guns. It eased other pre-Nazi era gun restrictions, however. German Aryans no longer needed a license to own a rifle. They could buy ammunition without a permit. And if you were a state employee, a Nazi Party member or part of a civil defense team, you did not need a license to buy and carry a handgun. Another gun control law went into effect on April 1, 1938. At that point, it became possible for German citizens (but not Jews or enemies of the state) to buy a handgun with a simple hunter's permit. All limits on buying ammunition were lifted. Carrying a gun in public required a license. Thus, the Nazi regime's restrictions were on citizenship and political reliability, not on guns per se. Hitler did not seize all the guns in 1934 or any other year. The militia-era poster was wrong in fact. And the question remains for the freedom fester described above: Should guns in the United States be restricted to citizens only? And what about those deemed by the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps to be unpatriotic "enemies of the state"?
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcnazimyth.html
Gun control, the Law on Firearms and Ammunition, was introduced to Germany in 1928 under the Weimar regime (there was no Right to Arms in the Constitution of 1919) in large part to disarm the nascent private armies, e.g. the Nazi SA (aka "the brownshirts"). The Weimar government was attempting to bring some stability to German society and politics (a classic "law and order" position). Violent extremist movements (of both the Left and Right) were actively attacking the young, and very fragile, democratic state. A government that cannot maintain some degree of public order cannot sustain its legitimacy. Nor was the German citizenry well grounded in Constitutional, republican government (as was evidenced in their choices at the ballot box). Gun control was not initiated at the behest or on behalf of the Nazis - it was in fact designed to keep them, or others of the same ilk, from executing a revolution against the lawful government. In the strictest sense, the law succeeded - the Nazis did not stage an armed coup. The 1928 law was subsequently extended in 1938 under the Third Reich (this action being the principal point in support of the contention that the Nazis were advocates of gun control). However, the Nazis were firmly in control of Germany at the time the Weapons Law of 1938 was created. Further, this law was not passed by a legislative body, but was promulgated under the dictatorial power granted Hitler in 1933. Obviously, the Nazis did not need gun control to attain power as they already (in 1938) possessed supreme and unlimited power in Germany. The only feasible argument that gun control favored the Nazis would be that the 1928 law deprived private armies of a means to defeat them. The basic flaw with this argument is that the Nazis did not seize power by force of arms, but through their success at the ballot box (and the political cunning of Hitler himself). Secondary considerations that arise are that gun ownership was not that widespread to begin with, and, even imagining such ubiquity the German people, Jews in particular, were not predisposed to violent resistance to their government. The Third Reich did not need gun control (in 1938 or at any time thereafter) to maintain their power.
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
The Nazi gun laws of 1938 reflect a liberalization of the gun control measures that had been enacted by the Weimar Republic with respect to the acquisition,transfer, and carrying of firearms. In this regard, Hitler appears to have been more pro-gun than the predecessor Weimar Republic
http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4029&context=flr
Of course, since nothing is stupider that the conventional wisdom, I'm sure the facts won't sway the gun aficionados. I fully expect to hear 'HITLER WOULDA GOT BEET IF HE HADN'T TOOK ALL THEM PEOPLE'S GUNZ" again before the week is out.
coffecreme 4 months, 3 weeks ago
he may think he is anonymous, but i know who pack is...
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Do tell....
coffecreme 4 months, 3 weeks ago
actually a nice guy in person... very surprised by his hostility on here
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
by dustyrhoades
(click to enlarge)
Middleman522 4 months, 3 weeks ago
So Dusty, Was there Gun Control in Germany in the 30's?
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Middleman, if you can't read, I'm not going to read to you.
Idiot.
Courseaire 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Mr. Rhoades: That was totally uncalled for.
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
http://thepilot.com/users/photos/2013/jan/04/23459/
Waah waah wahh. Why don't you or middleman address the three sources I provided for the facts rather than whining or re-asking a question a simple reading of the sources would answer?
Oh, that's right. You can't.
teufelhunden 4 months, 3 weeks ago
What a class act.
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
What an inability to respond to the refutation of yet another wingnut article of faith.
Talk to the hand. by LightWolf359
skylinefirepest 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Dusty, please walk outside your office and take a deep breath of the cool refreshing air in Carthage. You seem to be more uptight and arrogant today than usual. And the persistent name calling does get old after a while!
Thatcher 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Wow! A post with profanity, followed by a post with a crying baby, followed by a post with the Terminator. Persuasive! Cheers!
packwilleat 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Actually I have played rather well with most on here. While Dusty has never ruffled my feathers it's killing him to not know who I am. But in all honesty, I don't think I've had the pleasure of meeting Dusty face to face, although he has more than likely seen me plenty of times. ;-)
dustyrhoades 4 months, 3 weeks ago
I love the way you monkeys can't address my point, so you have to make the thread all about me.
Cheers!
packwilleat 4 months, 3 weeks ago
Dusty ~ what is your point? That the Nazi's disarmed enemies of the state. Why would any state disarm it's supporters?