Randy K. sent this interesting little snippet from the Enfield Independent regarding a historical display of a crashed Bf-109, which is an interesting view into modern sensibilities and a curious, to me, outlook on the portrayal of history - as well as an excessive personalization of things that happened to others, in other times, yet wrapping yourself in them.
Just as interesting is the little bit in the right sidebar of the linked piece, titled "Stop Knife Crime." Especially in conjunction with this article from the Daily Mail:
Parents are sending children to school in stab-proof uniforms to guard against knife crime, it has emerged.
They are paying a firm which makes body armour to line blazers and jumpers with a stab-resistant material called Kevlar.
The precautions are aimed at protecting pupils from knife attacks as street crime spills over into schools.
A wave of stabbings involving teenagers includes the killing of promising footballer Kiyan Prince, who was knifed just yards from his school gates in north London.
Now, I've long maintained that banning possession of the implements used by bad people to do bad things is the politician's easy out, enabling them to say "Look! We did something! You're safe again - now, Vote For Me!" when, in fact, they have but put a band-aid on the actual problem, which is much tougher to solve, will involve making judgements about people, and, dare we say it, sub-cultures within the greater culture, and perhaps, the greater culture itself (which, at least for the "progressive" elements, is actually *easier* to make condemnatory judgements about, because, after all, the white patriarchal power bloc is, in fact, the source of *all* evil in the world, and any lesser-sized elements of society are excused thereby, but I digress).
England effectively banned handgun ownership - which, predictably, caused a shift to blunt-force instruments and knives (though, as the black market adjusted, guns became available again to those who wished to obtain them for illicit purposes). Now, one can quite easily argue, "So what? It's harder to actually kill people with clubs and knives, so that's a net good."
Fair enough, as far as it goes. Does it also make it *easier,* in the greater culture and sub-culture, to use those tools against people - *because* it's perceived as being non-lethal, therefore you won't get in as much trouble? I only ask that question, because last I checked the stats, you are far more likely to suffer a home-invasion burglary with beatings in the UK than in the US - but you are less likely to get killed by a gun, true enough. But you are more likely to be victimized by direct personal violence. Trade-offs, I know.
Not surprisingly, the Usual Suspects in England have been running the usual traplines to... ban knives. They've enlisted chefs who have pontificated that, outside of professional kitchens with professionally trained staff, *no one* needs a knife longer than two inches - a size chosen by the medical professionals involved in this as being short enough to make the damage from stab wounds minimally dangerous while still actually allowing you to, oh, slice or chop something - though they'd really prefer to mandate the use of things like mandolins and food processors, etc.
Heh. In other words, pretty much what I, and many others, said on this subject some time ago.
My point? Focusing on the tools used gains small, incremental results - *and absolves the political and cultural elites from having to do the hard work - make judgements, and act on them, on those sub-groups in society where *most* of this violence, though certainly not all, emanates from - and they don't want to do that because there are all those ugly elements of ethnicity and minority status many times integral to it. So they take the easy way out, banning the implements, trampling the rights, livelihoods and habits of the law abiding - precisely so they don't truly have to do the ugly work of making judgements about the mores of less-inclined-to-be-law abiding groups.
An abdication of their responsibilities.
But, of course - that's also the fault of the electorate - because we don't demand they do it, and support them when they do, those times they timidly, tepidly try.
Just sayin'.
*I know this screed doesn't have any links in it to support my contentions, and I'm frankly too lazy to look 'em up on a Sunday morning.
16 Comments