How Much Do You Want to Keep Your Guns?

I

Ipecac

New member
The following is a reprint of an article by L. Neil Smith, noted libertarian writer and staunch pro-gun advocate. I post it to see your responses, pro or con.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Would you agree to permit adults to buy, sell, read, write, make, listen to, or watch whatever books, magazines, records, tapes, or movies they want, no matter how pornographic -- if they agreed to let you keep your guns?

Would you agree to tolerate Buddhists, Moslems, Taoists, Scientologists, Satanists, atheists -- if they agreed to let you keep your guns?

Would you agree to let women control their own reproductive process, have abortions (at their own expense) -- if they agreed to let you keep your guns?

Would you agree to allow people their own sexual preference, homosexual, bisexual, heterosexual -- if they agreed to let you keep your guns?

Would you agree to halt the "War on Drugs", to leave others alone, even to ruin their lives with alcohol,nicotine, heroin, cocaine, marijuana, LSD, or any other substance -- if they agreed to let you keep your guns?

Would you agree to respect the rights of anyone, no matter their race or national origin -- if they agreed to let you keep your guns?

***

No sane human being would sacrifice the rights he personally considers precious just for the sake of imposing his own tastes or opinions on others. Yet often it seems each of us disapproves of, and wants to outlaw, some one little thing that somebody else cares about or wants.

Little things add up: with over 200,000,000 of us, split into thousands of pressure groups, all working at the same time for one kind of Prohibition or another, it's no wonder government controls ratchet tighter around our lives every day. Until now, it's been a one-way process, with everyone on every side winding up the loser --except, of course, for politicians, bureaucrats, and lawyers.

But we can work together to reverse that process, by making a commitment to respect and defend each other's rights, no matter how much each of us may personally disapprove of any particular exercise of those rights. That doesn't mean you have to do anything bizarre or perverse yourself. I'm married, straight, don't use drugs (I'm literally an Eagle Scout) and I don't even drink. But also, I don't give a damn what my allies do with their ownlives, as long as they want to be free and can help me stay that way, too.

The one limit is an obligation never to initiate force against another person -- since that's how we began losing our rights in the first place.

Would this change the way we're accustomed to thinking about freedom? No, it would make our thinking consistent, put teeth into the Bill of Rights, and limit the power of politicians, bureaucrats, lawyers -- and
Prohibitionists -- to control the way we live.

Which means that every man, woman, and responsible child in this country, would be free once again to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- you
feel is desirable for sport or self-defense, any time, any place you want, without asking anyone's permission.

The other side's counting on us to remain divided and intolerant. That's how they got us where they want us to start with.

How do you get started? Try writing the Libertarian Party, DEPARTMENT LSAC, 1528 Pennsylvania Ave., S.E., Washington, DC 20003. Or call their toll-free number, 1-(800)-682-1776. If you have the courage and
intelligence to renew your commitment to the American tradition of individual liberty, they need to hear from you now.

I intend to keep my guns, and the rest of my rights, as well.

How about you?[/quote]

[This message has been edited by Ipecac (edited July 09, 1999).]

[This message has been edited by Ipecac (edited July 09, 1999).]
 
Ipecac, good post! We need to remember that the rights of others are just as important as our own. The founding fathers fought to ensure that future generations would have a choice, not be intimidated or dictated to. We need to pick up the gauntlet and smack those intolerant hypocrites, who want to run our lives, in the face.

Regards!

------------------
Yankee Doodle
 
I think this is an example of the meaning of the quote by Franklin wherein he stated "Those who give up....". What is advocated here, I have believed for years. Although I disagree with a lot of rights such as gays... I do respect their rights, just as long as they do not try and infringe on my right not to. Another example would be drugs. I am strongly against the use of drugs. But that is their right. I should not have any say in what they do. However, if they try to force me to use them, or to steal from me to support their habbit... then I have to draw the line. You get the drift.

Richard
 
If the other groups don't try to rub my nose in their beliefs, I won't rub their noses in my beliefs. Keep your stuff private and I'll do the same.

Until we infringe upon each others privacy, solitude, way of life, etc. it is NONE of the government's business.

And if it SHOULD become the government's business, it would be the business of the local or state government - not the federal government.
 
The problem is that the various factions and elements of the Libertarian Party can never agree on ideology enough to have any of their candidates elected to public office.

I agree with most of the planks in their platform, but a vote for them only makes you feel good and gets nothing actually accomplished.
 
Sounds good but it won't work. I don't want homos teaching my children under any circumstances. Then, too, you would probably arrest me if I were to spread sexually explicit material to your children. There are practicle limits to all freedoms based on the sensibilities of society. That's why we have some laws that don't make sense like making cross burning illegal and flag burning legal.

"I entirely concur in the propriety of restoring to the sense in which the Constitution was accepted and ratified
by the nation. In that sense alone it
is a legitimate constitution. And, if
that be not the guide in expounding
it, there can be no security for
consistent and stable government."
James Madison

Those who seek to enjoin new meaning out of the constitution are doing extreme damage to our system of government and don't even know it. They honestly think they are doing good. Where will they stop in corrupting the original meaning of the constitution? You need to ask yourself what kind of society do you want? Do you want all manner of perversions to be normal and encouraged? Do you want anyone to freely distribute any material to anyone they so desire like pornography to children, guns to gangbangers, narcotics to drug users, teaching positions to child molestors, etc?

Freedom is not absolute, there are practicle social limits. Those limits are always being pushed by the liberals and their media to encompase those things previously thought to be perversions or unthinkable. Like the marketing of violence to our children, making abortion a form of birth control, making homosexuality accepted as normal, putting queers into our military, etc, etc.

What kind of a society do you want? I suggest we keep with the original intent of the founders or you won't like what we will become....another Sodom and Gammorra, another Rome whose self destruction is imminent.
 
Frank,
If you've had kids in school, you've probably had "homos" and even child molesters teaching your children. So long as they don't teach homosexuality to my children or try to molest children, there would be no way to know what they are and nothing to punish.

As for teaching sexuality subjects, that's the parents' job. The state has NO business teaching masturbation to elementary school kids or "safe sex" for fun to junior high school kids. That what our former Governor Ann Richards wanted to do and we canned Ann.
-------

All,
If you have a better option than voting Libertarian - let's hear it!

It is the Republicans and Democrats who created the mess we have today - all the while telling us how much better it is getting.

They're a bunch of damned liars except for the few who are Libertarians in Republican clothing.

Make me believe I can vote for a change with the nominees selected by those who would enslave us! Show me I'm wrong! If you can do that, I WILL CHANGE!

Tell me Ron Paul, Bob Smith, or Alan Keyes have the backing of the Republican powers that be.

Until you show me a better option, I am only "wasting" my vote. You are voting for tyranny - the very SOBs that have put us in our current fix. Now THAT vote isn't wasted! It is a vote to take away our Bill of Rights, ignore our Constitution, and to put us into the United Nations as just another servile state. THAT is what you're voting for when you vote for "the only candidates who have a chance of being elected."

Now, you tell me how to change the status quo....

[This message has been edited by Dennis (edited July 09, 1999).]
 
Frank, a careful reading of the article will allay some of your fears. As to your bigotry, I don't think anything anyone could say would alleviate that.

Stoic, as to factionalized Libertarians, yep, sounds pretty much like a political party, don't it? In fact, I thought you were describing the Republicans.

Nothing said in the article is un- or extra-constitutional. It's all about not initiating force against others.

Thanks to all for the thoughtful responses.



------------------
"All I ask is equal freedom. When it is denied, as it always is, I take it anyhow."
 
Ipecac, in college sometime ago, I used to speak on behalf of the Libertarian Party and other issues of libertarian philosophy at political and academic functions around the country.

In my previous post, I was just speaking about the practical reality of things: Libertarians don't elect enough people in office to accomplish anything.

However, that doesn't mean that the philosophies embraced by the Libertarians have no worth. I wish that more would convert, but it isn't going to happen since the Libertarian Party has no appeal to moderates or the mainstream.

Maybe, we can change our two party government into a multiparty system and then the Libertarians and others would have a voice in government.
 
Even without a multi-party system, we can have some effect. Note that GW, George W. Bush, last week said he was not worried about conservatives abandoning the Republican Party.

Well, maybe he isn't. But if he's addressing that issue, he's concerned - more than he wants us to know.

If the Republicans perceive they are losing support to the Libertarian Party, the Reps will do something to win back those potential votes. After all, our politicians are not in the race to "serve America". They are in it for the money and power. Therefore, we must threaten their pocketbook and their position.

On a more personal level, I don't think I can hold my nose well enough to vote for the Republicans. They give lip service to the Constitution but, as Patrick Henry said, "We have no way to judge the future but but by the past." And the lables of "Democrat" and "Republican" are too similar for my liking.
 
I believe any one should be able to what ever they wanted - as long as what they wanted to do did not infringe on another persons rights... That includes ownership of weapons... even an M1A1 if they could afford it...
As long as that M1 was not doing dounuts on my lawn - or rolling over my car.... Fine.

Limited Anarchy? I dont know.

------------------
Every man Dies.
Not Every Man Truely Lives...
FREEDOM!

RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
 
Stoic, I couldn't agree with you more on the multi-party idea. However, I think Dennis is correct in his idea to either bring the Repubs around, or to abandon them to their fate. If they choose to become Democrats, then they choose to abandon all who have a different philosophy.

Kodiac, all we're asking for here is a return to governing under the original Constitution. Not anarchy by any stretch. After all, anarchy merely means, leaderless. Somehow I think you would do fine without others telling you what to do and when to do it. Anarchy is everyone taking responsibility for their own actions.

How stupid of me to leave off El Neil's webpage address: http://www.webleyweb.com/lneil/index.html

There's many more articles by Neil available at this site.
------------------
"All I ask is equal freedom. When it is denied, as it always is, I take it anyhow."



[This message has been edited by Ipecac (edited July 09, 1999).]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top