Quote of the day—Dr. Karim Brohi

It is ridiculous to suggest guns are part of the solution to knife violence.

Dr. Karim Brohi
May 7, 2018
At NRA Convention, Trump Slams Gun Control Laws in France & U.K.
[Apparently this crap for brains doctor has never heard the phrase, “Never bring a knife to a gun fight.”

I would like to suggest the good doctor should visit a USPSA match in the U.S. carrying a knife and see how much knife violence is possible.—Joe]


12 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Dr. Karim Brohi

    • He claims, “Trauma Surgeon, Royal London Hospital and Director, London Major Trauma System”.

      Expertise in one field does not necessarily improve ones ability to make correct decisions in another field. This is an excellent example of that.

      • Oh. Doctor of socialist medicine. So why should anyone care what he has to say?

      • To quote Will Rogers, a philosopher in the tradition of Socrates and Plato, Aristotle and Samuel Clemons, “There is nothing more ignorant than an educated man outside the subject of his education.”
        Dr. Karim Broh yet another example proving that truism.

        • Given the recent UK track record of deliberately killing hospital patients, I think the doctors there have regressed far beyond the level Rogers was thinking about. They aren’t even qualified in their alleged field.

  1. Has this silly bint been paying attention? The British police keep posting images of the ‘weapons’ they confiscate (and I use that term VERY loosely), triggering gales of laughter from those of us who live in actual civilization.

    *sigh* So much for formerly Great Britain.

  2. What if Brohi, intellectually, already knows the basics of everything you know about guns, and law and violence? Just imagine for a moment that he does. Then why would he say what he said? There are answers to that question.

    That would put a WHOLE different light on things, wouldn’t it, if many of those people actually do know what they’re doing? That would leave open the question of who’s the idiot, who “just doesn’t get it”, or who has crap for brains, wouldn’t it?

    And if indeed the only way evil can triumph is for good men to do nothing, then, again, who are the idiots here? Or is the problem simply an absence of good men?

    The British and their handlers have been accomplishing tremendous things in the furtherance of evil, and we in the U.S. aren’t very far behind them in that process. As much fun as it may be, can we afford to sit back, point at them and cackle?

    • In this case, it is my belief that the hypothesis of a mass delusion rather mass malevolence is more likely to be true.

      • Let’s go with “mass delusion, induced by the malevolent”– Delusions of such a specific and consistent nature aren’t so pointedly, actively and unwaveringly promoted, maintained and defended by non entities. Such consistent effects have consistent causes. If the effects were much more random, then I’d agree with you completely, but they have a visible structure, a consistent history, consistent results and therefore, clearly, a purpose. Put any name to it you like, but it is nonetheless a willfully planned structure.

        As I’ve pointed out before, the enemy KNOWS how human rights work, and can zero in like a laser beam onto anything which offends or challenges evil. It is a willful, focused and very intelligent system, with marvelous tactics and a proven record of success. That doesn’t happen all willy-nilly.

        The first step in overcoming a problem (evil in this case) is in recognizing it. Once you realize that the world is a battleground in a war between good and evil, the frustrating complexities begin to look much simpler.

        If, on the other hand, your thesis is that one who succumbs to evil is a fool, with a sharply reduced brain capacity, then we’re getting into metaphysics. I cannot argue into the fine points regarding definitions of “fool” and “stupidity”, etc., in this case except to say that one must know another’s intentions before one can judge the “smartness” of his actions. If someone wants to kill you, and manages to kill you, I’m not going to say that your murderer was “stupid”— He accomplished exactly what he wanted to accomplish. Success. You could on the other hand say that he was “stupid” for wanting to kill you, but that’s a whole different subject.

        What we cannot afford is to regard the enemies of liberty as weak or stupid, because they certainly are neither. If they are “stupid” they are also clever, vindictive, highly intelligent, patient, organized and wondrously subtle.

        In short; we get back to the question of who is a perpetrator verses who is duped, and as I keep saying; we can address that subtle difference during the sentencing phases of their trials. Just don’t make the mistake of believing that there is no perpetrator, that all of this highly organized authoritarian system is without knowing or understanding, without a will or a purpose.

  3. Without knowing the particulars of every situation, it seems reasonable to think that someone in ER after being stabbed or beaten quite possibly needed a gun, and did not have one. The institutional surgeon on scene would hardly ever have this occur to him(her), but treating a gunshot wound would think about how horrible guns are-without thinking about the possibility that the perf treatment was administered by his patient’s intended victim.

  4. I estimate that 99.99% of all gun control advocates locked in a room with me wielding a knife and threatening their death, would pick up the firearm provided for their use on a nearby table and shoot me.

    No one will miss the 0.01% who are too stupid to even defend themselves.

    It sounds like the (former) Great Britain may have a higher than expected percentage in the second group.

Comments are closed.