User Tag List

Informational! Informational!:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 8 of 15

Thread: interesting gun essay...........

  1. #1
    rattler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    missing, presumed dead
    Posts
    8,554
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    interesting gun essay...........

    Why The Gun In Civilization?

    By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

    Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force.

    If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either
    convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of
    force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories,
    without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

    In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through
    persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and
    the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as
    paradoxical as it may sound to some.

    When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use
    reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or
    employment of force.

    The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal
    footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with
    a 19-year old gang banger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a
    carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in
    physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a
    defender..

    There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force
    equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all
    guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a
    [armed] mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's
    potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative
    fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

    People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the
    young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a
    civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful
    living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

    Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that
    otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in
    several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the
    physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.
    People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal
    force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with
    a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works
    solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both
    are armed, the field is level.

    The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian
    as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as
    a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

    When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but
    because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot
    be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because
    it enables me to be unafraid It doesn't limit the actions of those who
    would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would
    do so by force.

    It removes force from the equation...and that's why carrying a gun is a
    civilized act.
    cervid serial killer
    Know guns, know peace, know safety. No guns, no peace, no safety
    I didn't get stimulated but he kept his promise on change, that's about all I got left!
    http://www.wolfpointherald.com/--http://www.safety-brite.net/

  2. #2
    Stay chooned in for more! Clint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Metro Atlanta Area
    Posts
    9,681
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Look. No guns means no light sabres, and do we really want that? I don't want to live in a future with no light sabres.

  3. #3
    Illinois droseraguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,115
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Tell Jesse to put that in his pipe and smoke it.
    Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and The American G. I. One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.
    Romans 10: 9-13
    Growlist http://www.cpukforum.com/forum/index...04&#entry90304

  4. #4
    Nepenthes Specialist nepenthes gracilis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Alexandria Bay, NY Z-5a
    Posts
    6,341
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    BRAVO! YAY! I love it.

  5. #5
    Chefdjc91's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    66
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Humans are flawed in this aspect.



    That's why Utopia can never exist!
    I am going to visit the sarracenia in Oregon someday



  6. #6
    Whats it to ya? Finch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    3,472
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Eh, when you feel scared its easy to misjudge situations as more severe than they really are. Then you may be more prone to react with lethal force when it may not be necessary. Is it better to have 2 people alive and one beat up a bit than 1 person with a homicide on their hands.


    also, 'force monopoly'? it takes 1 well placed bullet to the head to take that guy down. We dont need automatic wepons to take downa guy holding automatic wepons.
    that makes no logic

  7. #7
    JRFxtreme's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    536
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Darn.. can't we just ban guns and re-elect swords as the great equalizer?

    When some maniac starts waving a gun around you can't safely watch the situation unfold. With swords you can just kick back at a safe distance, grab some popcorn, and watch the action!

    Plus its much easier to outrun a sword!


    VOTE YES FOR KATANAS!








  8. #8
    Doing it wrong until I do it right. xvart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Zone 8
    Posts
    5,594
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Or maybe politicians shouldn't be discriminating against guns only. We need more axe banning laws, too. There's enough people that get mutilated that we should ban axes. I mean, in all those situations an axe would be just as good an equalizer as a gun; in fact, in those situations a can of mace would suffice, too. Granted, you may not have enough mace for a group of gang bangers, but I certainly would think twice about the safety of my drunk friends if some geriatric is swinging an axe around like a crazy person.

    Gang banging thug: "Hey granny, I'm going to beat you up with my thug gang banging friends here."

    Granny: "Let me pull out my axe and if anyone steps one foot closer they are going to lose an arm! Now, maybe we talk this out in a reasonable manner like civilized people."

    Gang banging thug: "Well we've all got bats! What now, granny?!"

    Granny: "My axe has a longer handle..."

    xvart.

    OT: it's interesting that the spell check in firefox does not have "axe" in it's dictionary.
    "The tragedy of life is not that every man loses; but that he almost wins."

    "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •