"The Gun Is 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 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. But, a firearm makes
it easier for an 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 would
not 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 !!****
** **
** **
By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.) ****
** **
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
