WAR: Baghdad Residents Thwart Attack and Kill Three Militants

Three militants in Bahgdad were killed today, not as a security operation, but rather by potential targets. Shopkeepers and residents drew their own weapons and 3 insurgents when they began firing at passersby on the streets. Three bystanders were injured by the insurgent attack.



While I applaud the citizens for taking matters in their own hands, more emphasis needs to be placed on shoring up neighborhood security. Let we see armed neighborhood security groups proliferate and then one the insurgents are beaten back, it will be difficult if not impossible to get them to stand down.

This goes to show who the insurgents are attacking....and the iraqi civilians are the ones who took care of the insurgents....

Who thought the Iraqis would turn against the insurgents huh?.... After all, insurgents seem to be pretty good at killing more Iraqis than coalition forces...

While I applaud the citizens for taking matters in their own hands, more emphasis needs to be placed on shoring up neighborhood security. Let we see armed neighborhood security groups proliferate and then one the insurgents are beaten back, it will be difficult if not impossible to get them to stand down.

I think it may be useful to start putting together massive Iraqi neighborhood watches. Arm them, and let them take matters into their own hands. Most of the insurgents are really untrained, anyway, so I don't think we need trained security forces to handle the problem. I don't even think they'd be best at it.

Right on citizens of Bagdad. This is what I love to see, people sticking together for a common good. This is a really small piece of the puzzle that the Iraqis need to complete so that then we can have our troops come home.

Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
Arm them, and let them take matters into their own hands.

Oh fantastic idea, nothing bad has ever come from arming civilians. As said, the insurgents are being hidden by some of the population. Lets give weapons out and cross our fingers none of them get given over to the insurgents

Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
[I think it may be useful to start putting together massive Iraqi neighborhood watches. Arm them, and let them take matters into their own hands.

The problem as I see it, is after the insurgency. How many of these groups will expand into mini warlords ala Afganistan? We may kick out the insurgents only to create new ones

maybe this is a step in the right direction for them. they're standing up for themselves now .Hopefully the next step they take will be to form a goverment for themselves. And send(peacefully) the americans (and allies)home. Good for them.

Although I agree that security remains a big problem in Iraq, it is becoming more obvious that a different mind set is beginning to take shape. Iraqi's protesting violence, Iraqi's defending themselves against militants, Iraqi's attacking a Militant training center and killing 85 insurgents. Iraqi's defying terrorist and going to the polls to vote. Freedom is taking baby steps in Iraq and we are watching the birth of a new nation.

A perfect example of the sort of situation that requires the right to bear arms.

Do you have any idea of the homocide statistics in countries with the "right to bare arms"?

Originally posted by Muaddib
Who thought the Iraqis would turn against the insurgents huh?.... After all, insurgents seem to be pretty good at killing more Iraqis than coalition forces...

Well....they were being shot at....

The real key here besides the dangers of independent militias springing up is the fact that most Iraqi's realize that the insurgency is not interested in freeing them from the "oppression" of the United States as thier rhetoric would have it and are much more interested in act of terrorism against anybody.

Originally posted by Nygdan
A perfect example of the sort of situation that requires the right to bear arms.

Good point. It brings up another question: how far along is the process of writing a new Iraqi constitution? It will be interesting to see how much is adopted from other constitutuions, such as ours.

Back on topic, it is good that the Iraqi's are beginning to defend themselves. Soon the terrorists will have nowhere to hide in Iraq.

The problem as I see it, is after the insurgency. How many of these groups will expand into mini warlords ala Afganistan? We may kick out the insurgents only to create new ones

That happens when you put the power in the hands of some rich guy. I doubt this is any real problem with a bunch of average citizens.

Do you have any idea of the homocide statistics in countries with the "right to bare arms"?

It isn't very high in places like New Zealand and Canada.

Praise to the citizens who put themselves on the line to save their own freedom. This war has been too much about handing democracy to people, as has many other US involved conflicts. Now we begin to see people who want freedom and do not have to have it force fed to them by NEO-Cons. I do think that it is a shame though that these citizens who put their lives on the line were not the reason for this war but rather some misplaced weapons that half the world owns.

Why is it so bad that a country owns WMD when everyone else does? We worry about them attacking Israel when Israel has the bomb...lol....such a compasionate country are we, when no conflict in our history has been over human rights violations or for the good of other people, but rather because of political threat.

Originally posted by subz
Do you have any idea of the homocide statistics in countries with the "right to bare arms"?

Whats it matter? Human beings have a fundamental and inalienable right to have weapons, and this case illustrates exactly why.

FredT
is the fact that most Iraqi's realize that the insurgency is not interested in freeing them from the "oppression" of the United States

It was inevitable. The insurgents can't effectively attack the US Military. They've killed far more Iraqi Citizens than IP and Free Iraqi Army members, let alone Coalition Forces. Eventually it was going to catch up with them. Also, like any insurgents, they have to live amoung and off the people. People don't like being forced to give food and supplies to militants, even if they generally agree with their cause.

Originally posted by subz
Do you have any idea of the homocide statistics in countries with the "right to bare arms"?

If I'm not mistaken, England has very strict gun bans right. Yet in recent years the homicide rate has gone up, while in the US and other countries it has gone down....

Guns don't kill people, people kill people....or something like that

The fundamental right to bear arms is to protect the people from a tyranical government that will infringe on their rights. Guns are misused yes, but so are bats and knives. Let's ban baseball and eating steak!

Inalienable right to bare arms? I respectfully disagree.

Twelve days after 35 people were shot dead by a single gunman in Tasmania, Australia's state and federal governments agreed to enact wide-ranging new gun control laws to curb firearm-related death and injury

There was a decrease of almost 30% in the number of homicides by firearms from 1997 to 1998

This report shows that as gun ownership has been progressively restricted since 1915, Australia's firearm homicide rate per 100,000 population has declined to almost half its 85-year average.

The overall rate of homicide in Australia has also dropped to its lowest point since 1989 (National Homicide Monitoring Program, 1997-98 data). It remains one-fourth the homicide rate in the USA.

Ok so you've got the right to bare arms but because of that 4x Americans die because of it when compared to Australia which has banned all auto/semi-auto weapons. Still think its a great idea to arm the entire population?

In Canada, where new gun laws were introduced in 1991 and 1995, the number of gun deaths has reached a 30-year low.

Two years ago in the United Kingdom, civilian handguns were banned, bought back from their owners and destroyed. In the year following the law change, Scotland recorded a 17% drop in all firearm-related offences. The British Home Office reports that in the nine months following the handgun ban, firearm-related offences in England and Wales dropped by 13%.

A British citizen is still 50 times less likely to be a victim of gun homicide than an American.

Gun control website

From the Department of Justice Website

Approximately half of all robberies, about a quarter of all assaults, and roughly a twelfth of all rapes/sexual assaults involved an armed assailant.

DOJ Website

From WISQARS injury mortality report 2002(latest)
- 59,815 firearms deaths in the USA in 2002
- 152 firearms deaths for 0 - 4 year olds in 2002
- 150 firearms deaths for 5 - 9 year olds in 2002
- 531 firearms deaths for 10 - 14 year olds in 2002
- 4,997 firearms deaths for 15 - 19 year olds in 2002
Injury Mortality Report

Which as I wrote before is 50x that of Britains.

Wow good finds.

I love that phrase "guns don't kill people, people do".

The proper phrase should be "guns don't kill people, people kill people, with guns".

CAConrad0825
The fundamental right to bear arms is to protect the people from a tyranical government that will infringe on their rights. Guns are misused yes, but so are bats and knives. Let's ban baseball and eating steak!

The difference with knives are that at least the victim stands a chance. I don't know about you but i feel i stand a decent chance against someone trying to stab me with a knife compared to shooting me with a gun.



[edit on 26-3-2005 by rapier28]