Think Freely Media presents Common Sense with Paul Jacob

Don’t Demand Too Much

police, law enforcement, prevention, law, response, illustration, photo

It’s commonly said that government is here to protect us. Well, that’s one theory.

In the wake of the horrible massacre at the Pulse in Orlando, Florida, I’ve been hearing a lot of murmuring. People are wondering why a man who had been interviewed by the FBI several times in relation to possible terrorist activities could have legally purchased firearms without flagging greater attention.

Others complain that it took the police three long hours to gather themselves and enter the Pulse, to rescue the living, and kill (as they ended up doing) the shooter, Omar Mateen.

Where’s the protection? Where’s the security?

Governments don’t seem to be much good at that.

And why should we expect them to be?

It’s hard to collate information well — though the government had everything it needed, what it lacked was the sense and the willpower to do it. Why? Because novel, dispersed information is hard to deal with.

And let’s not second-guess the Orlando police. It’s a tough job dealing with a killer who wants to kill as many people as he can before he is, himself, killed.

If we wanted real security, real protection, we’d be more armed ourselves (the Pulse had security personnel, but the night club was a gun-free zone, so that’s not much protection), and we’d hire, by contract, security professionals to protect us.

Government police aren’t here to protect us. We have them to clean up after something terrible has happened. Re-establish order. Seek justice against the perpetrators. And, thus, provide “security theater,” more than security itself.

Governments are good at some things.

Just don’t expect more than they can deliver.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

police, law enforcement, prevention, law, response, illustration, photo


Photo credit: Elvert Barnes on Flickr


By: CS Admin


  1. I believe the current government is bent on victimizing uss rather than protecting us. There is no excuse for not rounding up Mateen before he wreaked his carnage.

    • 11th Gen American says:

      Since Obama can promote his globalist gun-control agenda every time a mass shooting occurs, I doubt very much he’ll ever to anything, nor allow agencies under his control, like the FBI, to take the steps necessary to prevent this type of tragedy, not when he has capitalized on them since the day he entered the Oval Office.  His globalist puppet masters, and those which control Hillary Clinton, cannot institute a One World Government Corporatist Tyranny until the American people are disarmed.  Hence the 9th Circuit Ruling this past week.  Americans must make it clear to Barack Hussein Obama and his globalist masters that they will be triggering a Second American Revolution if they attempt to disarm the American people, and hopefully they’ll be victims of it!

    • JdL says:

      Be careful what you wish for. A government that “rounds up” someone who merely espouses strong views is one that may eventually round you up too. Several South American countries have demonstrated what kind of society results.

    • Pat says:

      Mateen was under investigation at least twice, but the DOJ changed its rules several years ago to limit the amount of time the investigation could go on without charges being filed. Also,a former co-worker complained to his boss about Mateen’s behyavior toward him (harassment and excessive calls / texts) but the employer did nothing, rather than risk discrimination charges by the Obama DOJ. The warning signs were there but political correctness prevented their being acted upon.

  2. JFB says:

    This is an act of war perpetrated in concert with by a sworn enemy of the culture and freedoms of the United States.
    It was exacerbated by the weapons free zone, which intended to enhance safety of the citizens but accomplished the opposite. 
    It is a perfect, and tragic, example of refusing to recognize the result of poor public policy. 
    My prayers for the victims, those left behind and that this lesson will not be lost on the “leadership”. 
    I suggest if at least some of the patrons were armed, trained in self defense and therefore capable of resounding adaquately, the carnage might have been lessened.
    Reality is the government cannot prevent this form of assault short of absolute totalitarianism, which, by the way, it appears to be ever more willing to impose under the guise of providing a false sense of better protection.
    The progressives are already calling for more doublethink and “stronger” policies to further undanger innocents, as opposed to rationally identifying, recognizing and addressing what is a real and hot culture war wholly immune to their present proposed “solutions”. 

  3. Brian wright says:

    Another false flag most likely.

  4. Karen H says:

    The dust has far from settled on this horrible incident; it will take weeks of investigation before all the facts are revealed. (Facts & a web of terrorist activity is still being uncovered 6 mos later after the San Bernadino attacks) However, yes, Mateen was questioned 2x by the FBI. Because he was a citizen, apparently the FBI could not make a case against him based on what was found or discovered in the interviews. As Americans we shouldn’t want to be thrown in jail on suspicion or ethnicity.

    Mateen legally obtained firearms because he worked in the security industry. Perhaps greater scrutiny should’ve been conducted by the company that employed him.

    I don’t know how well other armed citizens would’ve done in a packed night club where drinking, etc had gone on. Perhaps a well trained gun owner could have taken Mateen down. But I can’t imagine the additional chaos of a multi-use gun fight.

    My biggest question in this incident is how did he get past the Club’s security? And why was there only 1 exit? The other exit was chained closed. That’s a fire hazard to boot.

    Lastly, I resent that every time one of these horrific acts of terrorism occurs, Pres Obama refuses to call it what it is… Islamic Jihad. And instead pontificates for gun control.

  5. Pat says:

    So many shootings take place in ‘gun-free zones’. What purpose is served by declaring a location ‘gun-free’ without appropriate enforcement procedures? I heard today that the shooter had scouted Disney World for his attack. Its measures can sometimes seem perfunctory, but at least Disney World checks bags before people are allowed into the park. What did the Pulse do?

  6. Excellent column Paul. Government is clearly unable to prevent such an attack, yet the response seems terribly slow. The bottom line is that people can protect themselves if given the opportunity. No sky marshalls protected passengers from the shoe bomber that Christmas Day a years ago, for example.

    What if one customer at the club had been carrying a concealed weapon? Dozens might have been saved. What if there were a Bowie Knife in every seat back of every airplane? Would we still need TSA and a bunch of incompetent bureaucrats allegedly “protecting” air travelers.

    Just a thought.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

© 2020 Common Sense with Paul Jacob, All Rights Reserved. Back to top