How else then, to explain the policemen with Fred Flintstone-esque Buffalo style Archaeopteryx drumsticks for personal protection?
His scribble yesterday accompanies an article made up of generalized whining about terror legislation. After all, guns will only hurt people, right?
This time it’s spun around the new law specifying Police powers as it relates to terror, which based on the nature of the complaints in the press, probably isn’t much different from the old body of law.
It’s hardly worth the effort to lament the possibility of there being a loss of life that might be found by anyone trying to hinder a poor little terrorist on his way to, say, Les Halles, one of the Airports, or some similarly crowded place to ‘express himself’ as a sort of performance artist. Which is precisly the right time and the right context to say "After all, guns will only hurt people, right?"
Like the international phone wiretapping flap, the press coverage of these things has become little more than a platform for grandstanding and outrage of some sort or another. And since the PCF announced that they didn’t like the measure, those emotions are now approved and blandly acceptable in a dim-witted sort of way. After all, guns will only hurt people, right?
It seems to me that the opposite is more likely to be true. Luvvies fight terror by opposing anyone who mentions it. That way it will all go away from the world of words - which is the only environment where they feel like they have any control.
No comments:
Post a Comment