NEW YORK GOVERNOR KATHY HOCHUL TALKS A GOOD GAME ABOUT COMMON-SENSE GUN LAWS BUT IS MUM ON COMMONSENSICAL ARMED SELF-DEFENSE

To say the New York Hochul Government, like the Cuomo Government before it, detests armed self-defense is the mother of all understatement.

While guns in the wrong hands threaten society, firearms in the right hands protect society. This is a truism that Anti-Second Amendment States like New York deny out-of-hand.

A seditious Press and medical organizations give these Anti-Second Amendment States ammunition to continue their false, noxious, monotonous, zealous tirades over “GUNS” and over the loaded phrase, “GUN VIOLENCE,” which has become a ludicrous stand-in for “CRIMINAL VIOLENCE” that, disturbingly, is rarely mentioned. The reason why is plain.

The phrase ‘CRIMINAL VIOLENCE’ directs one’s attention to the sentient agent of that violence. The phrase ‘GUN VIOLENCE,’ on the other hand, draws attention to the inanimate object, alluding to “THE GUN” as the threat to “PUBLIC ORDER AND SAFETY”— obscuring and minimizing the AGENT who CAUSES the violence, for it is the AGENT who bears sole responsibility for commission of a heinous crime. It is not the object that the AGENT happens to use to commit an act of violence that bears responsibility.

But that’s why “ANTI-GUN” proponents continue to use the phrase “GUN VIOLENCE.” They intend to focus attention solely on the implement used in violence, not the perpetrator of it.

But concomitant with that purpose, there is an insidious design element here. An “ANTI-GUN” government seeks to frustrate the law-abiding citizen’s access to firearms.

The New York Government historically has abhorred the civilian citizen’s access to firearms. The State’s harsh and extensive firearms’ laws exemplify that abhorrence.

The State talks incessantly about a need to fight “Gun Violence” to give short shrift to any discussion of the fundamental right of the people to keep and bear arms.

How is it that an inanimate object can cause violence? It can’t. Only a sentient agent can operate as a “causal” agent.

The New York Government detests both “THE GUN” and those individuals who wish to exercise their GOD-GIVEN RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS.

Defeating exercise of the right is an ever present, ever-insistent goal of the New York Government, insinuating and sliding through and infiltrating every policy touching upon public safety.

To be sure, promoting public safety is an obligation of a state. It is an important function if not THE MOST IMPORTANT function of a state. But, exemplifying the State function of promoting and ensuring PUBLIC SAFETY does not mean that the citizen has no responsibility providing for HIS PERSONAL SAFETY.

Of course, if New York’s Hochul Government had demonstrated quantifiable success in providing for PUBLIC SAFETY, many New Yorkers might perceive less reason to provide for, and be less predisposed to take action to secure their PERSONAL SAFETY from random violence.

They would exhibit less anxiety over that, notwithstanding the responsibility for securing one’s own SAFETY and WELLBEING rests today—as it always has—ON THE INDIVIDUAL, NOT ON THE STATE.

The Arbalest Quarrel has written extensively on this. See our articles in Ammoland Shooting Sports News: one titled, “The Government Cannot Protect You! You Must Protect Yourself!”, posted on August 6, 2020, and a second titled, “Can We, As Individuals, Rely On The Police To Protect Us?”, posted on November 26, 2019.

Government bears no responsibility for ensuring the safety of individuals within its jurisdiction except in rare, carefully defined circumstances.

In promoting PUBLIC SAFETY a state, and the regional and local governmental bodies, bear responsibility to provide for the safety and security of their respective communities as a whole, not the individual members who comprise those communities.

But Kathy Hochul has done a lousy job as the leader of New York in securing public safety. And New York City Mayor, Eric Adams, hasn’t done any better protecting the residents and workers of this immense metropolitan area.

The draconian State handgun law coupled with the NYPD’s numerous handgun codes and regulations have consistently frustrated the efforts of the citizens residing or working in NYC from ensuring their personal safety when traveling through the State—especially when navigating in, around, under, and through the concrete jungle of the State’s largest metropolitan center and one of the largest in the U.S., “THE BIG APPLE”—New York City.

Hochul jealously guards the State’s prerogative in promoting public safety and continuously fails. And at once, she frustrates a civilian citizen’s fundamental, unalienable, natural law right to provide for his own safety, utilizing the most effective means to do so, a firearm. Her obstinacy is insufferable.

Every word spoken about guns and every action taken by the Hochul Government to thwart exercise of the fundamental and unalienable right of the people to keep and bear arms serves as a testament to the New York Government’s contrariness toward both the certitude of the natural order of things in God’s creation and to the certainty of eternal natural law rights.

The Right of Self-defense of Mind, Body, and Soul is predominant in God’s Creation. This one Right subsumes all other natural law eternal rights.

This preeminent NATURAL LAW RIGHT grounds the SANCTITY and the INVIOLABILITY of the INDIVIDUAL (“THE COMMON MAN)”, in undeniable truth, demanding the subservience of government to the sovereignty of the COMMON MAN.

Here the COMMON MAN is the American citizenry—each and every one of us—in whose name the government (be it federal, state, or local) is permitted to function, and upon our will, is permitted to exist and persist.

But this requires government to serve OUR interests, consistent with the dictates of the Articles of the U.S. Constitution, the amendments thereto, and our original Bill of Rights.

The Sanctity and Inviolability of the Individual pervades the U.S. Constitution. This is by design.

The Sanctity and Inviolability of the Individual is concreted in the doctrine and philosophy of Individualism.

INDIVIDUALISM ENTAILS FREEDOM AND LIBERTY.

The lack of FREEDOM and LIBERTY impelled America’s FIRST PATRIOTS to action—their WAR FOR INDEPENDENCE—against the Tyrannical Rule of King George III of England.

Without extraordinary courage and the formidable power of their firearms and cannon, these Patriots could not have begun to effectively confront Tyranny, much less defeat it.

That they succeeded, is a testament to the indomitability of the individual spirit to confront Tyranny firmly, but no less is that success due to the caching of and efficaciousness of their weaponry and ammunition without which these First Patriots could not feasibly vanquish Tyranny.

THE RIGHT OF ARMED SELF-DEFENSE FOLLOWS FROM THE NATURAL INSTINCT TO SELF-PRESERVATION AND IS EMBODIED IN THE GENERAL RIGHT OF SELF-DEFENSE.

The RIGHT TO ARMED SELF-DEFENSE isn’t something distinct from but is implied in the general expression, “RIGHT TO SELF-DEFENSE.”

A person cannot ably defend himself from a dire threat to Self without the necessary tools to do so.

For the average person, this means becoming adept in the use of one’s firearm and having the will to use it when necessary to protect self and family.

The firearm is the beyond doubt the best defense against a violent predatory attack. And that holds true whether such predatory attack emanates from a beast of prey, or a predatory man that preys on innocent men, or the predatory man-beast of Government that—having abandoned all service to the interests of the citizenry and the Constitution that it is sworn to serve—malevolently, unlawfully, and ruthlessly turns against that citizenry, finding a new purpose in preying upon it.

THE KEEPING AND BEARING OF ARMS PURCHASED THE COMMON MAN’S FREEDOM FROM TYRANNY AND ONLY THROUGH THE KEEPING AND BEARING OF ARMS WILL TYRANNY OF GOVERNMENT REMAIN AT BAY.

PREDATORS ABOUND THROUGHOUT SOCIETY AND WITHIN GOVERNMENT.

It is a paradox rarely if ever mentioned, and, if mentioned, then vociferously denied by advocates of BIG GOVERNMENT, and of the “WELL-ENGINEERED SOCIETY.”

Both Government and Society are nothing more than social and political artifacts. They serve a vital function but only if they function on behalf of the Common Man. Unfortunately, though, through time, these artifacts tend to grow in size.

They become bloated, obese, and are extraordinarily expensive to operate. They forget whom they were created to serve. They serve only themselves and other craven beings who satisfy their wants. They transform into predatory creatures.

And, the American citizenry, the Common Man, suffers from the usurpation of lawful authority that rests in and with that citizenry, that Common Man—the American people.

The predator on the streets of a city continues to prey with abandon on the innocent citizen because Government and Society allow it, tolerate it, perhaps even encourage it.

The common man reacts to this. A GOVERNMENT MAY BELLOW ALL IT WANTS ABOUT ITS CONCERN FOR THE COMMON MAN AND ITS DESIRE TO PROVIDE FOR PUBLIC  SAFETY. BUT, the old adages, “WORDS ARE CHEAP, and “THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING” take on renewed significance—especially in New York.’

Just two days after the Bruen decision came down, NY Governor Kathy Hochul issued a statement, on her official website.

The Supreme Court’s reckless and reprehensible decision to strike down New York’s century-old concealed carry law puts lives at risk here in New York,  . . . Since the decision was released, I have been working around the clock with our partners in the legislature to craft gun safety legislation in response to this ruling that will protect New Yorkers. My number one priority as Governor will always be to keep New Yorkers safe.

Two years later, Hochul commended the U.S. Supreme Court, when it issued the Rahimi decision, all the while reciting the same tiresome platitudes such as “gun safety laws save lives,” and exciting the passions with colorful but vacuous phrases such as “deadly weapons of war,” and extolling the virtues of New York’s gun laws.

Today’s Supreme Court decision reinforces a simple point: common-sense gun safety laws save lives.

In New York, we have some of the nation's strongest laws to keep people safe from gun violence and protect survivors. Our nation-leading efforts to expand Red Flag Laws and restrict access to deadly weapons of war are continuing to improve public safety. And in this past year's Budget, we invested more than $40 million to crack down on abusers like Zackey Rahimi and provide resources for survivors.

But our work is not over. The Bruen decision, and countless other lawsuits filed in its wake, are a chilling reminder that our gun safety laws are consistently under attack. New York will not stand by, and I’m committed to doing everything in my power to keep New Yorkers safe.

Yet, the Hochul Government has done little to nothing “to keep New Yorkers safe.”

“Crime in New York State 2022 Final Data” tells the tale:

Index crime in New York State increased (+22%) in 2022 compared to 2021, with 421,322 Index crimes reported. The increase was driven by a 25 percent increase in all three property crimes and increases in the violent crimes of robbery (+25%) and aggravated assault (+9%). Murder (-11%) and rape (-4%) both decreased. The state’s Index crime rate declined by 3 percent when comparing 2013 and 2022. During the same time period, the violent crime rate increased 11 percent and New York State experienced a 36 percent increase in firearm-related homicides when comparing 2013 to 2022 (See page 4 for additional details). This significant increase mirrored trends that occurred nationally.

New York City Index crimes increased 27 percent in 2022 compared to 2021, with increases in both vio lent crime (+15%) and property crime (+32%). Three of the four violent crimes saw increases: rape (+6%), robbery (+25%), and aggravated assault (+12%). Murder was the only violent crime to decrease (-10%). All three property crimes increased during the same period: burglary (+26%), larceny (+33%), and motor vehicle theft (+31%). Non-New York City Index crimes increased 16 percent in 2022 compared to 2021, largely due to an 18 percent increase in property crime. Violent crime increased about 1 percent, with decreases in murder (-11%) and rape (-11%), and increases in robbery (+9%) and aggravated assault (+3%). Property crime increased 18 percent, with increases reported in all three crimes: burglary (+10%), larceny (+20%), and motor vehicle theft (+13%). Appendix 3 lists crime rates by county for 2022 and Appendix 6 details crime counts by county for 2021 compared to 2022.

See also report of the New York State Comptroller.

What can the average, honorable, responsible man do to ensure his own safety and well-being and that of those dependent upon him from a PREDATORY THREAT, whatever the nature of THAT THREAT and wherever that THREAT LURKS?

One noteworthy person, Jocko Willink, a former U.S. Navy Seal, writer, podcaster, instructor, and businessman, has advice for THE COMMON MAN, going about his daily activities, not looking for trouble, but coming face-to-face with a vicious predator that is out to cause trouble, looking for an easy target. See the article in Business Insider:

Willink says,

If someone attacks me and they want to punch or kick me, I can just run away. They're not holding onto me. I can get away from them. It's when someone grabs you that you need some technique to get out of there, or someone takes you to the ground — that's when you need some technique to get out of there. If someone just wants to punch me, well, I'll walk away from them or run away from them. That's OK.

Hi, I'm Jocko Willink. I'm retired from the military and just wrote a book called Discipline Equals Freedom Field Manual.

Obviously, I am a fan of jiu-jitsu. No. 1: It's very practical, like I said, for self-defense. And again, the goal of jiu-jitsu in self-defense isn't to take someone down to the ground — the goal in jiu-jitsu for self-defense is actually to be able to defend yourself on the ground, get up, and get away from an attacker. That's what the goal is.

Now, some people might think: ‘Well, Jocko, I don't want to run away if somebody wants to fight me. I want to fight them.’ Well, let's think about where that might end up for you. No. 1: You don't know if this person has a weapon or not. What if they have a knife? What if they have a pistol? What if they've got three or four friends? And now you're getting either shot, stabbed, mutilated, or otherwise maimed and killed. That's not what you're looking for on a Friday night as you're walking down the street.

OK, so let's say you're so tough that the other guy — he doesn't have a knife, he doesn't have a gun, he doesn't have any friends — and you take him out and break his arm, choke him, and put him to sleep. Well now guess what happens? You're getting arrested. Now you're getting in a lawsuit. Now you have to pay this person money that you actually wanted to beat up.

So it's a lose-lose situation to get in a confrontation on the street. If you can break contact and get away, break contact and get away. That's what you should learn self-defense for. Obviously, if someone is doing something that they're attacking someone in your family and you have to step in to defend yourself, well, that's why you continue training all the time — because that might happen, and you have to be prepared for that. Optimally, you get out of there: You break contact, you get away. If you have to stand and fight, you train yourself so that you're able to do it.

Sure, it helps to be physically strong and to become adept in the martial arts. But that takes a modicum of time and money, and a presumption of physical prowess many people lack, including not a few senior citizens and young (or old) physically disabled individuals, women (of all ages) generally, and those Americans who have suffered grievous injury serving their Country in war. And likely, such an elderly person or a disabled civilian or veteran of combat cannot easily run or outrun a predator intent on committing physical assault or murder. What does a person do, then?

Willink has an answer for that, too, but it is one that a “left-center bias” website like Business Insider likely frowns on, and, so, refrains from mentioning.

But another website we came across that cites this Navy SEAL’s remarks on personal defense, does not display such reticence. We point to that site, a military website, for the answer. See “We are the mighty”:

When it comes to self-defense . . . Jocko Willink . . . has some answers. And they are surprising. . . .

When it comes to self-defense, Willink’s top recommendation isn’t a martial art in the strictest sense. It’s a gun and concealed carry. [emphasis our own]

‘If you are in a situation where you need to protect yourself, that is how you protect yourself,’ he said, noting that potential adversaries will have weapons, they will be on drugs or suffer from some psychotic condition. ‘If you want to protect yourself, that is how you do it.’”

Bar none, a handgun is the best defense against a dangerous threat. You can’t “reason” your way out of a threat posed by a lunatic hopped up on drugs or a psychopathic killer looking to have some “fun” at the expense of an innocent citizen. If these creatures were sane and reasonable, they would not engage in physical violence.

But suppose—notwithstanding the Bruen rulings—a jurisdiction effectively denies the citizenry from carrying a handgun in public for self-defense through the enactment of extremely onerous, expensive,  time-consuming, and frustratingly incoherent licensing schemes.

Jocko Willink continues,

Okay, great. That works in the states that have ‘constitutional carry’ or ‘shall issue’ carry laws. But suppose you are in California, New York, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Maryland, Rhode Island, or Delaware which the National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action notes are ‘Rights Restricted – Very Limited Issue’ states where obtaining a concealed carry permit is very difficult?

Willink then recommends Brazilian jujitsu, followed by Western boxing, Muay Thai, and wrestling (the type you see in the Olympics, not the WWE – no disrespect to the WWE). Willink is a proponent of jujitsu in particular – recounting how he used it to beat a fellow SEAL in a sparring match who had 20 years of experience in a different martial art.” Id

But, even protecting yourself without a firearm is fraught with peril.

Again, Jocko Willink knows this, and finds this so disconcerting, he feels it important enough to mention and and we reiterate [see citation infra].

OK, so let’s say you’re so tough that the other guy — he doesn’t have a knife, he doesn’t have a gun, he doesn’t have any friends — and you take him out and break his arm, choke him, and put him to sleep. Well now guess what happens? You’re getting arrested. Now you’re getting in a lawsuit. Now you have to pay this person money that you actually wanted to beat up.

So it’s a lose-lose situation to get in a confrontation on the street. If you can break contact and get away, break contact and get away. That’s what you should learn self-defense for. Obviously, if someone is doing something that they’re attacking someone in your family and you have to step in to defend yourself, well, that’s why you continue training all the time — because that might happen, and you have to be prepared for that. Optimally, you get out of there: You break contact, you get away. If you have to stand and fight, you train yourself so that you’re able to do it.”

Just ask Daniel Penny about lawsuits and criminal indictments. See the article in the Daily Mail. This is the situation that a person defending himself or others,

A grand jury has indicted former Marine Daniel Penny for the chokehold killing of homeless man Jordan Neely during a subway confrontation last month, sources have told The Post — even as Penny’s attorneys vowed to ‘aggressively defend’ their client in court.” Daniel Penny indicted in chokehold death of Jordan Neely. Fortunately, a jury found Penny not guilty of criminally negligent homicide, after an acquittal on the more serious manslaughter charge.

See also the 2007 article by Marko Kloos, titled, “Why the Gun Is Civilization,” in “The Patriot Post.”

Those jurisdictions that restrict armed self-defense, such as New York, typically impose limitations on basic self-defense measures, not just firearms. That is the point raised by Jocko Willink. He knows well that this world is not civilized. Dangerous predators abound all around us. He doesn’t mince words. That is refreshing. And obdurate governments like New York’s Hochul Government refuses to acknowledge the world is as uncivilized today as at any time in the past.

Claiming that disarming the public will somehow promote safety is imbecilic if in fact government leaders truly believe that. All it will succeed in doing is making society less safe, opening it up to more, not less, predation.

So, then, why do governments, like the Hochul Government, make a pretense of concern over the well-being of the Common Man—the Public?

The only reasonable answer is that governments themselves are predatory beasts. They do their best to disguise that fact by claiming that universal disarmament protects us all. That is all a cloak.

Instead, universal disarmament opens up predation to the worst of predators: the Man-Beast of Government.

Willink is one man standing up to monsters.

And the Hochul Government is one such monster.

The Government does nothing to reduce the ever-present danger to the Common Man. Instead, it exacerbates it.

It allows predators to rampage in New York, and, at once, frustrates the innocent New Yorker who simply wishes to mitigate a danger directed against himself, be it from a lunatic on the street or—not inconceivably—from the psychopathy of the Government itself, inching ever closer to Tyranny.

__________________________________________________________