In this age of fear and panic, whipped up by Nanny and a careless/slipshod media, it should come as no surprise to learn that there are elements of society who cower behind their curtains fearful of deranged gunmen and terrorists wandering the streets ready to slaughter thousands.
Common sense, and the concept of looking at the statistical probability of being shot/blown up have been thrown out of the window.
This point is amply demonstrated by the recent problems arising in Pickering, in Ryedale Yorkshire, over their regular war weekend where people dress in wartime uniform, complete with replica Second World War firearms.
Needless to say, one resident has got herself worked up by Nanny's scare stories and complained about the replica guns.
Margaret Devonshire wrote to both the town council and Ryedale's police commander, Inspector Helen Taylor, asking for the weapons to be banned.
She said:
"Why does the council allow people to roam the streets of Pickering during the war weekend, holding guns?
In this day and age when you can't tell the difference between a real and a replica gun, it should not be allowed and the council should ban them."
Miss Devonshire made the same complaint last year too, something of a hobby for her by the sound of it.
She went on:
"With all the shootings and killings in this country, we should be thinking of our own youngsters and trying to protect them. I am not a fanatic, but someone who totally dislikes guns and the danger they bring, and I object to them on the streets of Pickering for any reason.
I want Pickering to be a safe town to live in and not one where people can carry guns.
Can you imagine how easy it would be for a 'nutter' to wander around our streets with a gun and end up shooting someone because he was able to carry a real gun, everyone thinking it was a replica."
Former mayor Coun Margaret Lowe joined in:
"We take such a lot on trust. We have thousands of visitors come into Pickering for the weekend. Such an incident could happen."
Indeed it could, maybe, but then again it could happen if the maniac concealed his weapon too.
The banning of the prominent display of guns will not alter the risk of a nutter wandering down the street with a concealed weapon, and shooting the place up.
The ban only assuages the fears in the minds of a few paranoid people, by taking away the public display of an object that they dislike.
The risk factor of being slaughtered has not changed one iota!
The mayor, Coun Julie Hepworth, caught the paranoia too:
"We should probably stop and think about this.
We are seeing young people dying on our streets."
Yes we are seeing young people dying on the streets (not thousands though), but these young people are usually involved in gang violence and are invariably being killed by knives.
Guns or knives used in these gang killings are concealed, therefore again the risk factor will not change simply because you have banned the public display of replica weapons at a special event.
Why are other events around the country allowed to proceed?
Cutlasses are used during a seafaring festival in Whitby, and the Sealed Knot battle re-enactment group used muskets and pikes.
Using Miss Devonshire's "logic", all films that are shot in public places would have to ban replica guns and weapons too.
The police check the replicas for use at the war weekend first.
Sgt Gary Ridler, of Ryedale police, said:
"The issue of the de-activated weapons has been broached on numerous occasions and we are normally given due notice that the relevant people will be carrying them.
There are no offences being committed."
Therefore in order for someone to bring in a real gun, he would have to conceal it; which is exactly what he would do on a non war weekend.
Again, to repeat myself, the risk factor for being slaughtered by a nutter does not change by banning replica weapons at this one off event.
As ever in the Nanny state, one person with an axe to grind over "risk" seems to have a disproportionate amount of influence over the majority.
That is not a healthy state of affairs.
I recently went to a country music club where many of the people were dressed up as cowboys, (Not me!) many were wearing old wild west guns around their waist. Guess what? I felt no fear for being close to these people with guns, then again I am a sensible person that does not need Nannying.
ReplyDeleteI agree Ken, we do give too much influence to single issue groups and individuals, each trying to dictate to the rest of us how to live our lives.
Ken, Tonk,
ReplyDeleteClearly neither of you understand the risks that exist in the world today. We must leave this to World Class Nannies to explain to us.
For example in today's Daily Mail is a story about a newly born lamb in a field in Norfolk that somehow become entangled by the string of a Marks and Spencer promotional balloon that had drifted 40 miles from its escape point in Spalding (iirc).
Now the chances of this string and the newly born lamb being in the same place at the same time might be less than miniscule but the risk of a repeat is so great that Nanny M&S has banned the use of balloons which she says she was 'phasing out' anyway.
Hopefully the lamb will have a long and satisfying life .... oh, err, it's a lamb so give is a few weeks and it will probably end up in a kebab somewhere.
So, presumably all sort of balloons will be banned in the very near future unless a risk assessment has been carried out before inflation.
Has nobody thought of banning Gordon Brown based on much better evidence of public harm from inflation? If not, why not? Are the options worse?
Grant
I love British mysteries/detective shows, but being from the US I am often shocked to see Morse or Frost or one of Britains iconic good guys approach/chase a bad guy unarmed. Are even your cops not allowed to carry a piece? Of course if I were to only go by media reports, your cops don't go after bad guys. Of course, if you were to go by media report, the US is one big "gun culture". (Lie!)Yeah, the bad guys have guns, but they do everywhere. Law abiding citizens are allowed to own guns, and many do, legally. THEY are not the problem.
ReplyDeleteKen said,
ReplyDelete"As ever in the Nanny state, one person with an axe to grind...seems to have a disproportionate amount of influence over the majority".
But it's only ever people with negative things to say that Nanny listens to. One person, or 7000,000people in favour of smoking in pubs? - sod off.
1 person wants responsible adults to be stopped from (responsibly) playing with pretend guns (after due inspection by the law)? Absolutely right on.
Let's stop the Sealed Knot, WWII re-enactment groups everywhere else, those Pirates who terrorise Whitby and anyone else doing things that people like Ms Devonshire might conceivably dissaprove of while we're at it.
Back where I used to live there were several War Memorials that depicted soldiers holding representations of rifles and stuff like that: aren't they likely to entice people to smuggle in weapons on Armistice Day?
I used to go to a New Year's Ball back home where, every year, Old Father Time - carrying a scythe - would appear at midnight on New Year's Eve.
"Can you imagine how easy it would be for a 'nutter' to wander around our streets with a scythe and end up decapitating someone because he was able to carry a real scythe, everyone thinking it was a replica."
God save us from those who want to save us!
Yes, we have the Margaret / Julie / Margaret types in our village too. It’s sometimes difficult keeping up with their list of grievances but cars seem to be a uniting theme. Fortunately, there's always something than can be done for an easier life.
ReplyDeleteFor example, wrt exceeding a speed limit, they seem to react more to engine sound than absolute speed. So accelerating from 10 to 25 mph in a 30 mph zone turns heads whereas driving steadily at 40 mph is less likely to be noticed.
It's like the ancient Chinese story of the monkeys complaining to their trainer that they aren't happy with their banana rations and the fact that they're hungry every afternoon.
After a heavy session of protracted negotiations it was agreed that they would each receive three bananas in the afternoon and two bananas in the morning instead of three in the morning and two in the afternoon. Everyone was happy with the new arrangement even though it was based on withholding one banana while the total remained the same.
It was presented to the Emperor as a model for how he should run the empire to keep the people happy.
Okay, it may be a Nanny-based model but it has its time and place, and people are more likely to accept it when they think they've won an argument.
It should be taught as part of police training.
Anon 11:44am said
ReplyDelete"Okay, it may be a Nanny-based model but it has its time and place, and people are more likely to accept it when they think they've won an argument."
True.
The entire tenancy of Nu-Labour as an alleged 'government' in the UK has been based on precisely this principle. Well, that plus the belief that there will never be a large enough and cohesive enough group complaining and pointing out the real deficencies of the political 'elite'. (An oxymoron if ever there was one.)
Grant
Perhaps they should ban trousers for Miss Devonshire's sake. trousers are often know to have thing/s. concealed in them that really would alarm her.
ReplyDeleteNanny must now ban trick or treating (perhaps she already has under child safety laws) as a satanist could easily pass themselves off as a kid looking for a hand out of candy when in fact they were a devil worshipping killer in search of human sacrifices.
ReplyDelete