View Single Post
Old 04-18-2013, 11:17 AM   #17
SaxonViolence
Senior Member
Brawn
Points: 1,222, Level: 19 Points: 1,222, Level: 19 Points: 1,222, Level: 19
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
 
SaxonViolence's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 208
Reputation: 15410
SaxonViolence is a dedicated contributorSaxonViolence is a dedicated contributorSaxonViolence is a dedicated contributorSaxonViolence is a dedicated contributorSaxonViolence is a dedicated contributorSaxonViolence is a dedicated contributorSaxonViolence is a dedicated contributorSaxonViolence is a dedicated contributorSaxonViolence is a dedicated contributorSaxonViolence is a dedicated contributorSaxonViolence is a dedicated contributor
Exclamation

My analogy of Cars to Guns was questioned.

I have a problem with brevity...

Let me try to put forth my position as Follows:

The Anti-Gun Position is Implicitly Argued as Follows:

{And anyone who thinks that I'm setting up a Strawman, please let me know how I could be fairer to the Hoplophobes...}

Major Premise:

Safety and Security are more important than a Free Man's Abstract Right to Bear Arms...

So if it can be shown that Guns create more Net Problems than they Solve, the Right to Arms is not Absolute.

Minor Premise:

At this point in time, more restrictive regulation of Arms would result in Greater Safety.

Conclusion:

More regulation is Desirable.

Some even say that complete banning would be the best course of action.

Pragmatic Dithering:

While we are not capable of banning all Arms, "We" (the Hoplophobes) should make some compromises—both in the interest of "Doing what's Possible" and some even want to level the playing field somewhat between Armed Hooligans and Citizens.

I grow very tired of people who say that they're "Pro-Gun" and debate the Accuracy and Truthfulness of the Minor Premise ad nauseum.

I believe that the Minor Premise is Patently False, but it is also a Red Herring.

I categorically reject the Major Premise.

If the Major Premise is False, then the Conclusion is Invalid. The Minor Premise is Irrelevant and the Pragmatic Shilly-Shallying is flapping in the breeze even harder than it otherwise would.

Man is born a mewling, rather disgusting and incomplete sort of thing.

We have no Fur or Feathers to protect us from sun and cold.

Our teeth really aren't up to grinding enough food for us.

We have No Natural Weapons.

But God, in his infinite wisdom gave us something even better—a Brain.

Man makes clothing to cover his nakedness. Actually, clothing is far more versatile and allows greater cleanliness than Fur or Feathers.

He builds a fire to warm him, cook his food to make it more digestible and to scare away predators.

Later he builds grinders and mills to make bread—and spare his teeth even more.

Right from the very beginning, man fashioned Weapons. This came about so early in our history, that it is an essential part of who and what we are.

The Stone Age man armed with a good stout Flint-Tipped Spear was a match for any Cave Bear or Saber-Tooth Cat that he might meet.

Think not?

Elemental game theory:

Bear eats man unscathed: −1

Man Walks away unscathed; Bear Dead: +1

Man Rams Spear deep into Bear. Man Dies. Bear dies within a few days from his wounds: 0

Yeehaw!

Cave Man can generally Force At Least a Draw...

And Cave Men travelled in Gangs.

Thing is:

Weapons improve. A man with a Flint Spear is a wee bit disadvantaged against an archer with longbow and broadheads.

The Samurai truthfully said:

"The Sword is The Soul of The Samurai."

They meant that the Katana and Wakizashi were essential parts of The Samurai. Take them away, and he was no longer Samurai.

{Note: Except as some sort of Temporary Expedient to regain a pair of Swords, a Flint Spear was worthless so far as being a Samurai.}

Today the "Soul" of the Modern Day Samurai is the 1911A1 or other Suitable Big-Bore Pistol.

It is a part of him and when he must be separated from it even momentarily, he suffers all kinds of Psychic Trauma.

Imagine that for some reason men evolved (no, I don't believe in Evolution—go with me a moment...)

Man evolved into a legless being.

Advanced Prosthesis were available, but why do you need to be nimble and fast—unless you want to snatch purses, climb ladders to burgle or fight or run from the Laws?

After all, everywhere you might reasonably want to go, is handicap accessible...

For the few who want to go Rocky Mountain Sheep Hunting or to Climb Mt Everest or something...

Well, you can get a pair of legs—if your record is spotless and you pass all the Psyche tests...

But don't think that you can walk around on your legs in town!

Now how do you feel, dragging yourself through the gutters and slug tracks...

Broken and incomplete—solely through Government Fiat...

And what kind of Rage do you feel when you see a "Civil Master" walk blithely past you...

Condescending because he is allowed Legs and You Are Not?

That is the issue.

A Gun is of far more personal and moral import than a car or a house or anything else.

The Primary purpose of Any State is to Secure the Right of Free Men to go Armed.

When a Government Fails this task, it is completely useless.


Saxon Violence
SaxonViolence is offline   Reply With Quote