Advertisements

UK Police Tell Subjects Not to Harm Their Attackers, Get a Rape Alarm

remote.axd

The latest dispatch from the United Kingdom’s ongoing campaign to eliminate all forms of armed self-defense seems too incredible to be true. Unfortunately, after tracking down the origin of a publicly distributed statement regarding self-defense products on the country’s “Ask the Police” website, we can confirm that British subjects continue to live at the mercy of their potential attackers.  Even to the point of baffling absurdity.

“The question at issue asks, ‘Are there any legal self defence products that I can buy?’ Succinctly epitomizing the sad state of natural rights in Great Britain, the first sentence states, ‘The only fully legal self defence product at the moment is a rape alarm.’”

The statement appears in the Frequently Asked Questions section of www.askthe.police.uk – a site that is operated by the Police National Legal Database.   Information provided by the PNLD and its site are used by localpolice constabularies to help inform the public.

“The site is so concerned with the well-being of violent criminals, that in the context of dye sprays, it states,’be aware that even a seemingly safe product, deliberately aimed and sprayed in someone’s eyes, would become an offensive weapon because it would be used in a way that was intended to cause injury.’”

The question at issue asks, “Are there any legal self defence products that I can buy?” Succinctly epitomizing the sad state of natural rights in Great Britain, the first sentence states, “The only fully legal self defence product at the moment is a rape alarm.”

“So even in the sanctity of one’s home, the statement seems to suggest that care for violent offenders outweighs the rights of potential victims to be safe and secure against attack.”

And to add even more insult to human dignity, the statement cautions subjects against the use of nearly any other type of defense product, and reads like an appeal for victims to graciously suffer criminal violence. The answer makes clear “You must not get a product which is made or adapted to cause a person injury. Possession of such a product in public (and in private in specific circumstances) is against the law.”  So even in the sanctity of one’s home, the statement seems to suggest that care for violent offenders outweighs the rights of potential victims to be safe and secure against attack. Read the rest of this entry »

Advertisements