––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Posted: December 02, 2008
1:00 am Eastern
© 2008
The Mumbai massacres were shocking and gruesome enough, but the eyewitness story told by photographer Sebastian D'Souza should serve as a wakeup call to Americans who still enjoy one of the few societies in the world that hasn't been disarmed. D'Souza's office at the Mumbai Mirror is directly across from the city's Chhatrapati Shivaji train station attacked by heavily armed and well-disciplined terrorists. He described the way the gunmen shot their automatic weapons at anyone and everyone – handing off their weapons to comrades who would reload for them so the killing never stopped. But most shocking was his depiction of masses of armed policemen hiding in the train station and refusing to shoot back while the bloodbath continued. "There were armed policemen hiding all around the station but none of them did anything," he explained. "At one point, I ran up to them and told them to use their weapons. I said, 'Shoot them, they're sitting ducks!' But they just didn't shoot back." His disturbing story continued: "I told some policemen the gunmen had moved toward the rear of the station, but they refused to follow them. What is the point of having policemen with guns if they refuse to use them? I only wish I had a gun rather than a camera." I would like every American to meditate deeply on those words. (Column continues below)
We're told by many in our society that guns for self-defense are an anachronism. They tell us, "That's what we have policemen for." But this is hardly the first time policemen have failed to stop a bloodbath. In a free, self-governing society, we all have that responsibility. We can't expect policemen to be everywhere. And, if they are, we no longer have a free, self-governing society; we have, by definition, a police state. It's time for Americans to understand the difference – and enthusiastically embrace the protections of our gun rights our founders built into the Constitution. They did so for two main reasons:
They understood all people are endowed by their Creator with the right to defend themselves. That means they have the right to bear arms. In fact, I think the founders understood citizens vigilant about protecting innocent life actually had a duty to be armed.
They understood government must never have a monopoly on force, or the people would become subjects of that government rather than its master.
Whenever incidents like the massacre in Mumbai occur, I tell people about what I consider to be one of the most important books ever written on the subject of armed self-defense. It's called "Shooting Back: The Right and Duty of Self-Defense" by Charl van Wyk. I feel so strongly about this book, originally written and published in South Africa, that I published it here in America through WND Books. In addition, I produced a documentary DVD video about the incredible story. Charl van Wyk is a Christian missionary who went to church one evening in 1993 when it was attacked by terrorists wielding automatic weapons and hand grenades who were determined to kill every last one of the worshippers. But because Van Wyk had brought with him his .38 revolver, he was able to return fire and actually frighten off the more heavily armed intruders who were not expecting any opposition. Though it was the worst church massacre in South Africa's history, van Wyk saved the lives of hundreds. His book is the story of that attack and much more – specifically, it is a Bible study on the Christian duty to protect the lives of innocents through armed self-defense. I urge you to buy the book and the documentary and use them as tools to educate yourself, your family and your friends about the important issues it raises for times like these. I, for one, never want to find myself in the predicament of that photographer in Mumbai who says: "I only wish I had a gun rather than a camera."
