The police cadets’ harrowing true story highlights critical themes regarding personal safety, the effectiveness of self-defence, and the broader implications of victim disarmament. The proverb, “Two men can keep a secret if one is dead,” attributed to the Hells Angels, underscores the treacherous nature of those who perpetrate violence and the lengths they will go to conceal their actions. This analysis will connect the personal account of confrontation with potential invaders to the broader concept that the standards we apply to others often return to us, particularly when considering issues of gun control and national security.
Context of the Story
In 1979, the police cadet found himself in a perilous situation when he and a trainee nurse were pursued by a group of men who presented a legitimate threat. The cadets’ quick thinking, intuition, and readiness to use a bluff—a long handle car jack pretending to be armed—allowed them to escape a potentially deadly encounter. The narrative illustrates the unpredictability of violence and the reality that victim disarmament can leave individuals vulnerable to those intent on harm.
The Measure You Apply to Others
The cadets’ experience provides a lens through which to understand the notion that “the measure you apply to others is the measure applied to you.” The criminals in his story assumed that their dominance and control would go unchallenged. However, the invitation to return home safely and the proactive steps taken by the cadet to protect himself and his companion highlight a critical assertion: individuals must be equipped to defend themselves or risk becoming victims.
In applying this principle to the broader discussion of gun control, one could argue that disarming law-abiding citizens effectively hands over power to criminals. If society expects individuals to rely solely on law enforcement or the government for protection, that same society must ensure that these entities are equipped and responsive. As the cadet noted, confidence in deterrence is diminished when potential victims are disarmed. The inherent danger is that disarmament does not affect the intentions of those engaging in criminality—instead, it changes the calculation of risk for invaders.
Victim Disarmament and National Security
The concept of victim disarmament can extend beyond personal encounters to the national level. In a global context, the failure to equip citizens and effective local defense means amplifying vulnerabilities. Just as the men pursuing the cadet sought to exploit their power over victims, nations with disarmed citizens can become prime targets for external aggression. An invader assessing a nation’s preparedness might perceive the availability of arms among its citizens—enabling resistance—as a significant deterrent.
When a nation embraces the ideology of disarmament, prioritizing control over individual rights, the consequences may include decreased public safety and increased susceptibility to invasion. By dismantling the means for self-defence within the populace, a government could inadvertently signal to adversaries that the potential for organised resistance is weakened.
The cadets’ cautionary observation—that a bluff that might have worked decades ago would likely not deter potential criminals today—evokes a sobering realisation about the repercussions of victim disarmament. The implication is straightforward: as the means of self-defense diminish, so too does the resolve of society to protect itself, which could lead to disastrous outcomes.
Conclusion
The cadets’ story serves as a stark reminder of the personal stakes involved in the discussion on gun control and victim disarmament. The correlation between self-defense and national security encapsulates a critical truth—those who would be inclined to harm others often do so knowing their victims are defenseless. The measure of safety afforded to others reflects back on the society that implements such measures. Disarming law-abiding citizens increases the likelihood of becoming targets, ultimately risking the destruction of not only individual lives but entire nations. By understanding this dynamic, we can better advocate for a balanced approach to gun control that emphasizes protection, preparedness, and public safety.