• Home • Downloads • Your Account • Forums • 
Site Info v2.2.2
Last SeenLast Seen
Server TrafficServer Traffic
  • Total: 63,665,288
  • Today: 5,922
Server InfoServer Info
  • Feb 23, 2018
  • 12:17 pm CST
Right to Carry Needed to Stop Terror Attacks

ABC Original story here

US and European officials said Tuesday they have detected a plot to carry out a major, coordinated series of commando-style terror attacks in Britain, France, Germany and possibly the United States.

A senior US official said that while there is a "credible" threat, no specific time or place is known. President Obama has been briefed about the threat, say senior US officials.

Intelligence and law enforcement authorities in the US and Europe said the threat information is based on the interrogation of a suspected German terrorist allegedly captured on his way to Europe in late summer and now being held at Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan.

US law enforcement officials say they have been told the terrorists were planning a series of "Mumbai-style" commando raids on what were termed "economic or soft" targets in the countries. Pakistani militants killed 173 people with guns and grenades during the 2008 attacks in Mumbai, India.

In testimony before Congress last week, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said, "We are all seeing increased activity by a more diverse set of groups and a more diverse set of threats."

Officials in France have put the country on high alert for a terror attack and authorities in Paris shut down the Eiffel Tower for the second time in two weeks today after what was termed a "false alarm."


ICarry.org commentary: 10 gunmen supposedly killed 173 people in Mumbai.  That is an average of over 17 kills per gunman.  I wonder how they would have faired against armed citizens?  Try that in Vermont, Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Indiana, or the dozens of other states that have armed citizenry!!!

If a terrorist wanted to commit these types of attacks, I can bet you they would target a state like Illinois or Wisconsin, New York, New Jersey, or some other anti-rights state that prohibits self-defense.  They would also probably target a school, church, or government building that bans guns.  The so-called "Gun Free Zones" make the best targets for this kind of thing.  It's hard for one terrorist to kill 17 people if some of those people are armed.  When they are all defenseless, it's very easy!

We've been telling people this for years.  We were talking about gun free zones back in 2005 when we started.  People ought to start listening!!!!  We predicted an event like the NIU shooting in Illinois, and it happened.  This is reason enough right here to exercise what the US Supreme Court has said is a fundamental right - the right to bear arms!!!

Posted on Tuesday, September 28, 2010 @ 23:35:16 CDT by ShaunKranish
click Related        click Rate This        click Share
Right to Carry Needed to Stop Terror Attacks | Login/Create an Account | 2 comments | Search Discussion
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register

Re: Right to Carry Needed to Stop Terror Attacks (Score: 1)
by shacker on Saturday, October 16, 2010 @ 13:53:34 CDT
(User Info | Send a Message)

"10 gunmen supposedly killed 173 people in Mumbai. That is an average of over 17 kills per gunman. I wonder how they would have faired against armed citizens? "

This incident has actually caused a grassroots campaign (albeit, a very small one) within India regarding the right be armed. Some have called upon the people to demand that there be an American style constitutional amendment that gives the citizenry the right to be armed.

I'm interested in how it plays out. Since there's a pretty big European influence over India in general, guns are still a big no-no (unless you're military... or a pakistani terrorist).

Re: Right to Carry Needed to Stop Terror Attacks (Score: 1)
by P6Carrier on Tuesday, November 16, 2010 @ 21:44:01 CST
(User Info | Send a Message)

Because of a systematic armed police state, we're not at the same risk as third world countries. What we're mostly at risk from in our states (Il and Wi) are illegally armed american criminals (intentionally lowercase). If I'm walking down the street and someone jumps me, I can't be carrying, because then I'm the bad guy. That answer isn't addressing international terrorism, but rather domestic crime. Take a look at Fort Hood. Bans on firearms on military bases allowed the Fort Hood shooting to get more out of hand than it should have, and domestic police forces are what ended it. International relations should have nothing to do with my being able to carry a gun. It should all be domestic.

Newsletter Signup

Federal Firearms Laws Fraud Revealed

The Federal Government has no constitutional authority to regulate firearms.  How then have all these federal laws been passed and enforced?  What about all the new laws that are always hanging over the heads of tens of millions of peaceful gun owners?


Sadly, you will only find it here.  Encourage other pro-gun organizations to copy and post this information!!!

Old Articles
Cast Your Vote
Current big Survey...
What do you think is the most effective action?

Votes :607

List of all Surveys
Join Us on Facebook!

Click here to join us on Facebook

Page Generation: 0.13 Seconds
:: fisubsilver shadow phpbb2 style by Daz :: RavenNuke theme by www.nukemods.com ::