Chris in AL
New member
Well said, Mr. Volk.
Why do you have guns -- Part 2
- Thread starter sbryce
- Start date
- Status
Folkbabe, welcome to TFL! I freely admit some prejudice toward you for choosing such a neat username.
First, where I come from: I was raised in a small, xenophobic, ultra-right-wing "fundamentalist" baptist Southern background. After some social exposure, I find myself a far cry from my roots: I favor removing laws prosecuting every "victimless crime" (virtually all "vice" crimes), and I am an agnostic buddhist.
I own firearms, foremostly, because I feel it is my duty to do so. Everything else is secondary. I feel that being a healthy and reasonably young citizen of this country forces me to assume some responsibility for her protection. I gladly take up that responsibility, for I love my country, and all things that make her great- individual responsibility and ambition, generosity, and innovation.
Besides being my duty, I own firearms for philosophical reasons. You see, I value human life to the extreme. Life of all kinds is sacred, a wonderful gift from the universe to be fully exploited, and protected. An honest understanding of existence points out that there must be death (in our terms) of some sort for any being to continue existence. That death may be animal or vegetable, but death it is. As long as that life-sacrifice is respected and utilized, that harvest is good and righteous, an expression of thanks to all that is for providing what is needed to continue existence in our current form. When the harvesting of life is done in a careless or wanton way, it is wrong, whether it is chopping down a plant or killing an animal.
I value human life especially, since it is known that we have been gifted with the tools to further our own internal evolution. I value it enough to be willing to risk my own life to protect the sanctity of another's existence, and I am willing, without qualm or hesitation, to take a life to preserve the sanctity of life. (Please contact me directly if you would like to discuss this further.) To be willing to accept encroachments on your own or another's person and spirit in the name of compassion is false love, a denial of all things that make human life worth experiencing. It is a devaluation of human life, and I am saddened to encounter such callousness for the spirit of another.
Of much lesser importance, I own firearms because I enjoy them as interesting, functional mechanical objects. I am always interested in new designs of virtually anything, and it is fascinating to compare both history, performance, and technical specifications of firearms in my meager (aprox 16) collection.
Safer? I feel fairly safe. I am in very good condition, blindingly fast, and a longtime martial artist. To have no "need" of firearms would require an environment of respect amongst all mankind, of mutual cooperation, and an absence of all animal predation. To understand our world is to understand the impossibility- indeed, the starched, sterile, homogenous and utterly unfulfilling nature- of a world devoid of risk. Risk reminds us of how good it is to be alive. Celebrate life with me.
Even in such a world, I would keep my guns so I could understand their intricacies and enjoy their usage. (At this point, I'm really much better with a staff, though!
)
Best Regards,
John
First, where I come from: I was raised in a small, xenophobic, ultra-right-wing "fundamentalist" baptist Southern background. After some social exposure, I find myself a far cry from my roots: I favor removing laws prosecuting every "victimless crime" (virtually all "vice" crimes), and I am an agnostic buddhist.
I own firearms, foremostly, because I feel it is my duty to do so. Everything else is secondary. I feel that being a healthy and reasonably young citizen of this country forces me to assume some responsibility for her protection. I gladly take up that responsibility, for I love my country, and all things that make her great- individual responsibility and ambition, generosity, and innovation.
Besides being my duty, I own firearms for philosophical reasons. You see, I value human life to the extreme. Life of all kinds is sacred, a wonderful gift from the universe to be fully exploited, and protected. An honest understanding of existence points out that there must be death (in our terms) of some sort for any being to continue existence. That death may be animal or vegetable, but death it is. As long as that life-sacrifice is respected and utilized, that harvest is good and righteous, an expression of thanks to all that is for providing what is needed to continue existence in our current form. When the harvesting of life is done in a careless or wanton way, it is wrong, whether it is chopping down a plant or killing an animal.
I value human life especially, since it is known that we have been gifted with the tools to further our own internal evolution. I value it enough to be willing to risk my own life to protect the sanctity of another's existence, and I am willing, without qualm or hesitation, to take a life to preserve the sanctity of life. (Please contact me directly if you would like to discuss this further.) To be willing to accept encroachments on your own or another's person and spirit in the name of compassion is false love, a denial of all things that make human life worth experiencing. It is a devaluation of human life, and I am saddened to encounter such callousness for the spirit of another.
Of much lesser importance, I own firearms because I enjoy them as interesting, functional mechanical objects. I am always interested in new designs of virtually anything, and it is fascinating to compare both history, performance, and technical specifications of firearms in my meager (aprox 16) collection.
Safer? I feel fairly safe. I am in very good condition, blindingly fast, and a longtime martial artist. To have no "need" of firearms would require an environment of respect amongst all mankind, of mutual cooperation, and an absence of all animal predation. To understand our world is to understand the impossibility- indeed, the starched, sterile, homogenous and utterly unfulfilling nature- of a world devoid of risk. Risk reminds us of how good it is to be alive. Celebrate life with me.
Even in such a world, I would keep my guns so I could understand their intricacies and enjoy their usage. (At this point, I'm really much better with a staff, though!
)Best Regards,
John
jeffer said:
"Short and sweet, I like to shoot--target shoot. If the time comes to defend my child and I do nothing I would want to die myself."
The only thing that I would change in his statement is to replace "child" with "family".
------------------
"Lead, follow or get the HELL out of the way."
"Short and sweet, I like to shoot--target shoot. If the time comes to defend my child and I do nothing I would want to die myself."
The only thing that I would change in his statement is to replace "child" with "family".
------------------
"Lead, follow or get the HELL out of the way."
The imperative duty of defense is the primary reason I study the martial arts, which includes the practical use of the pistol, rifle, and shotgun. Many samurai referred to the ultimate assault weapon of their time (the sword) as a life giving instrument, I see it no differently. Escaping a BG will save 1 life, yours. If things go to hell and the options run out, maybe you have to kill him. There will be no future potential victims for him, The ratio favors life and improves the quality of it for those who remain. Maybe the world breathes a little easier for the absence of one who has no regard but for themselves, regardless of the pain they cause to others.
I agree that the divine breathes in all things. Violent people destroy the temples in which that divine breath exists.
Archaic? Metaphysical? maybe. I won't stand around idly and watch while things go to hell.
I agree that the divine breathes in all things. Violent people destroy the temples in which that divine breath exists.
Archaic? Metaphysical? maybe. I won't stand around idly and watch while things go to hell.
Hi Folkbabe, welcome to our playground! 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by folkbabe:
1) Shooting cops, even in response to police brutality, is the fastest way I can think of (perhaps short of assassinations) to turn the general public against your cause. It also gives the establishment an excuse to stomp you very hard and people will think it is justified. When you reply with violence to violence you lose moral authority. Unless you're already strong enough to simply overthrow the system you're not going to get very far by giving the system an excuse to crush you at the same time you alienate the general public. Besides, individual cops are not the enemy. Acting as if they were just divides the working class.
Civil disobediance / non-violent direct action is the only way to effectively fight for change because anything else and you're not going to be around very long. Armed rebellion is not, IMHO, an effective way to build a new society because when you form armies to fight in your armed rebellion you are setting up heirarchical structures. What you end up with is just a new boss. Also, the technological divide between the people and the government is much greater now than it was during the war for independence.[/quote]
Well, let me illustrate why you must sometimes resist with force the establised powers of government.
Story
Zimbabwe veterans' boss gets suspended term and fine
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
"Ordinarily, the court would have imposed an effective jail term
but there are factors...that required the court to take a more
lenient position," Bartlett said.
Earlier a lawyer for the Commercial Farmers Union (CFU), which
represents 4,500 white farmers, appealed to Bartlett not to send
Hunzvi to jail saying "the issuing of a custodial sentence is totally
undesirable in these circumstances."
[/quote]
So let's recap... this maggot was found guilty of inciting riots which resulted in the death of a quite a few people. Said maggot will not get time in prison because everyone, including the plaintifs, are convinced that it will mean further riots, and further loss of life.
The criminals are allowed to go free because they are threatening to cause more violence if they are punished.
This, in my humble opinion, is a clear example where the government enforcement and judiciary forces are no longer working for the benefit of the people and could be considered the enemy.
The people are not allowed to own the proper tools to defend themselves from the rioters and the government will not act sufficiently to protect life.
~USP
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by folkbabe:
1) Shooting cops, even in response to police brutality, is the fastest way I can think of (perhaps short of assassinations) to turn the general public against your cause. It also gives the establishment an excuse to stomp you very hard and people will think it is justified. When you reply with violence to violence you lose moral authority. Unless you're already strong enough to simply overthrow the system you're not going to get very far by giving the system an excuse to crush you at the same time you alienate the general public. Besides, individual cops are not the enemy. Acting as if they were just divides the working class.
Civil disobediance / non-violent direct action is the only way to effectively fight for change because anything else and you're not going to be around very long. Armed rebellion is not, IMHO, an effective way to build a new society because when you form armies to fight in your armed rebellion you are setting up heirarchical structures. What you end up with is just a new boss. Also, the technological divide between the people and the government is much greater now than it was during the war for independence.[/quote]
Well, let me illustrate why you must sometimes resist with force the establised powers of government.
Story
Zimbabwe veterans' boss gets suspended term and fine
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
"Ordinarily, the court would have imposed an effective jail term
but there are factors...that required the court to take a more
lenient position," Bartlett said.
Earlier a lawyer for the Commercial Farmers Union (CFU), which
represents 4,500 white farmers, appealed to Bartlett not to send
Hunzvi to jail saying "the issuing of a custodial sentence is totally
undesirable in these circumstances."
[/quote]
So let's recap... this maggot was found guilty of inciting riots which resulted in the death of a quite a few people. Said maggot will not get time in prison because everyone, including the plaintifs, are convinced that it will mean further riots, and further loss of life.
The criminals are allowed to go free because they are threatening to cause more violence if they are punished.
This, in my humble opinion, is a clear example where the government enforcement and judiciary forces are no longer working for the benefit of the people and could be considered the enemy.
The people are not allowed to own the proper tools to defend themselves from the rioters and the government will not act sufficiently to protect life.
~USP
The question of responding and retaliating against violence with violence is a verly clear and clean philosophy.
To think that the use of force, even deadly force, is never justified is to kneel at the feet of your oppressor and beg for a quick and clean death, which is at the discresion of the oppressor.
To think that the use of force, especially deadly force, is to die knowing that you are preventing the oppression of those too weak to defend themselves.
To expect others to struggle fruitlessly under an oppressor is insulting. in a nice kinda way!
The moral high ground is never in question, except by those who do not occupy it. But there is always room for one more!
~USP
To think that the use of force, even deadly force, is never justified is to kneel at the feet of your oppressor and beg for a quick and clean death, which is at the discresion of the oppressor.
To think that the use of force, especially deadly force, is to die knowing that you are preventing the oppression of those too weak to defend themselves.
To expect others to struggle fruitlessly under an oppressor is insulting.
in a nice kinda way!The moral high ground is never in question, except by those who do not occupy it. But there is always room for one more!
~USP
Mike in VA
New member
Why do I have guns?
Utility - guns are tools, pure & simple, useful for many things, not the least of which are -
Recreation - I enjoy the challenge & aspire to the discipline & skills in the shooting sports. I find it entertaining and relaxing.
Provenance - though I don't currently hunt, I have in the past and could in the future, should the need arise.
Security - my own, my family's, my communitiy's.
Because I can.
M2
Utility - guns are tools, pure & simple, useful for many things, not the least of which are -
Recreation - I enjoy the challenge & aspire to the discipline & skills in the shooting sports. I find it entertaining and relaxing.
Provenance - though I don't currently hunt, I have in the past and could in the future, should the need arise.
Security - my own, my family's, my communitiy's.
Because I can.
M2
- Status