Something I find myself repeating often in political discusions is that the gun control issue really has little to do with firearms, and more to do with freedom in general. The anti freedom forces can whip up a feeding frenzy and get rights thrown out by appealing to the emotions. This tactic is very effective on folks from all parts of the political spectrum. The next time you find yourself shouting "Those people shouldn't be allowed to do that!", ask yourself, was the possum right when he said "We have met the enemy, and he is us."
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Is it really about firearms?
- Thread starter Jack M
- Start date
Someone's tag line says it all:
"It's not about guns; it's about control."
------------------
John/az
"When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!
www.cphv.com
[This message has been edited by John/az2 (edited July 31, 2000).]
"It's not about guns; it's about control."
------------------
John/az
"When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!
www.cphv.com
[This message has been edited by John/az2 (edited July 31, 2000).]
Jeff Thomas
New member
I certainly agree. This debate is not really about firearms ... it is about citizen control.
Yesterday my attention was drawn by some liberal comment about a government program ... the individual example wasn't important. What was important was their insistence that we pass some new law. And, I remembered an interesting essay an older gentlemen gave to me once, quite a while ago.
Liberals, and fascists (sometimes the same, I realize), seem forever bent on reducing our freedoms. Today, they're also, theoretically, against firearms.
But when they get their new law or their new tax, what prompts our obedience? Coercion. Coercion by armed force, I'll add.
The very people who claim they are against 'guns', 'violence' and force are actually quite comfortable using such violence against you and me. They just don't want to dirty their own hands. My older friend's essay pointed this out, quite eloquently ... he said that we must all remember that when we demand a new law or tax, we're really saying that this is important enough that we're willing to use force and incarceration against our neighbors in order to accomplish the goal.
Such people wish to pay a government worker to use force against us in order to remove our means of self defense, steal our property, and reduce our freedoms.
So, yes, I agree totally. At its core, this debate is not at all about guns, since people like HCI, VPC and now the so-called Million Mom March are really quite comfortable with guns. They simply want the government to use them against American citizens ... especially those Americans who still have this quaint belief in freedom and the Bill of Rights.
I saw 'The Patriot' again yesterday, and one line stuck out for me ... Benjamin Martin's sister-in-law invites him to sit down with her on the beach, and says 'It's a free country, or at least it will be ... '. We don't hear that comment much any more, do we? Sadly, I don't wonder why.
Take care. Regards from AZ
Yesterday my attention was drawn by some liberal comment about a government program ... the individual example wasn't important. What was important was their insistence that we pass some new law. And, I remembered an interesting essay an older gentlemen gave to me once, quite a while ago.
Liberals, and fascists (sometimes the same, I realize), seem forever bent on reducing our freedoms. Today, they're also, theoretically, against firearms.
But when they get their new law or their new tax, what prompts our obedience? Coercion. Coercion by armed force, I'll add.
The very people who claim they are against 'guns', 'violence' and force are actually quite comfortable using such violence against you and me. They just don't want to dirty their own hands. My older friend's essay pointed this out, quite eloquently ... he said that we must all remember that when we demand a new law or tax, we're really saying that this is important enough that we're willing to use force and incarceration against our neighbors in order to accomplish the goal.
Such people wish to pay a government worker to use force against us in order to remove our means of self defense, steal our property, and reduce our freedoms.
So, yes, I agree totally. At its core, this debate is not at all about guns, since people like HCI, VPC and now the so-called Million Mom March are really quite comfortable with guns. They simply want the government to use them against American citizens ... especially those Americans who still have this quaint belief in freedom and the Bill of Rights.
I saw 'The Patriot' again yesterday, and one line stuck out for me ... Benjamin Martin's sister-in-law invites him to sit down with her on the beach, and says 'It's a free country, or at least it will be ... '. We don't hear that comment much any more, do we? Sadly, I don't wonder why.
Take care. Regards from AZ
Jack,
I'm afraid it's about both, and that's a BIG part of the problem . . . .
For many ordinary citizens, it's about guns. They are worried by firearms, terrified by their potential, and can't understand either the self-defense or the preservation of liberty arguments associated with firearms ownership (particularly handguns). I am not defending these misguided individuals, but I will accept their sincerity.
For most politicians, however, it's clearly about control. They are exploiting the genuine, although foolish, feelings of the many crime-apprehensive citizens for their own selfish and illegitimate political ends.
I'm afraid it's about both, and that's a BIG part of the problem . . . .
For many ordinary citizens, it's about guns. They are worried by firearms, terrified by their potential, and can't understand either the self-defense or the preservation of liberty arguments associated with firearms ownership (particularly handguns). I am not defending these misguided individuals, but I will accept their sincerity.
For most politicians, however, it's clearly about control. They are exploiting the genuine, although foolish, feelings of the many crime-apprehensive citizens for their own selfish and illegitimate political ends.
For most anti-firearms individuals, the issue is being scared of guns and fearing for their safety. They regard guns as a threat.
They see no good in free civilian ownership.
For politicians, it is simply which position gets the votes. Despite all the conspiracies which fill the gun world, apply Occam's razor - they just will say anything to get elected.
Ignoring this fact and spouting a whole bunch of philosophy misses most of the dynamic.
Gore was pro-gun until it benefited him to be antigun. If the Republican base had all the same opinions except for guns, the party would cut the RKBA blank out of the platform.
That's all there is, really.
They see no good in free civilian ownership.
For politicians, it is simply which position gets the votes. Despite all the conspiracies which fill the gun world, apply Occam's razor - they just will say anything to get elected.
Ignoring this fact and spouting a whole bunch of philosophy misses most of the dynamic.
Gore was pro-gun until it benefited him to be antigun. If the Republican base had all the same opinions except for guns, the party would cut the RKBA blank out of the platform.
That's all there is, really.