Posted on 08/15/2011 3:59:48 PM PDT by SlaveNoMore
Why The Gun Is Civilization
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 gangbanger, 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 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 weightlifter. 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.
- Marko Kloos
Gun control is kinda like trying to solve drunk driving by making it harder for sober people to own cars.
London, last week, was a glaring example of this!
I would add money as a separate category with reason and force. I wouldn’t put money under reason. How many times have you done something unreasonable because your boss asked you to do it?
Money is persuasion. If your boss asks you to do something unreasonable, you have a choice. Do it and keep taking his money, or stop taking his money.
Well some people would do that with GPS speed control, Ignition interlocks on all cars that one would have to blow into before you could drive ect.
No better example exists.
It’s one of the few weapons that doesn’t require an actual use to be effective; showing it is often sufficient.
A well written article in the style of Thomas Sowell. Short, well written, to the point, and impossible to refute.
Logic works for me. Love Thomas Sowell!
Does anyone have a current link/email to the article/author of this article, I would like to know....
Ref
http://gunnyg.wordpress.com/2008/11/15/a-gunny-g-excerpt-why-the-gun-is-civilization/
Gunny G aka: Dick Gaines
******
No Guns; No Peace
Know Guns; Know Peace
If you do not own an assault weapon by now, you are a moron.
Regards, Doodles
I own several `assault weapon lookalikes’.
Does that make me a genius? Well, it sure beats being an unarmed moron.
Any assault lookalike will do. We are on the same side my friend. You are very well informed. Ease off.
Regards, Doodle
No Second Amendment...
Know Tyranny!
I used to, before that unfortunate fishing expedition . . .
His email address is in the text under the photo at this link...
http://munchkinwrangler.wordpress.com/about/
Link to the article “why the gun is civilization.” by Marko Kloos...
http://munchkinwrangler.wordpress.com/2007/03/23/why-the-gun-is-civilization/
There’s also a good deal of information about Marko Kloos in this article/interview by Oleg Volk...
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/ccm-columns/marko-kloos/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.