A lot of gun owners say they support the "right to keep and bear arms". Some of them even know that "to keep and bear arms" means to own and to carry weaponry.
A lot of gun owners also say they will refuse to comply with any attempt by government agencies to register firearms.
Maybe.
If you don't carry a gun with you as you go about your daily life, you are not living the "keep and bear arms" you claim to support. Your "support" is empty and meaningless.
If you do carry, but submit to a "carry permit" before you "bear arms" then you are already agreeing to register your guns. Because you have already done so. Your refusal to comply is moot. Empty and meaningless words.
What part of "shall not be infringed" are you having trouble understanding? Do you not understand that Natural Law says you have the absolute right- simply because you are alive- to provide for your own defense regardless of what anyone else may demand?
I'm not telling you what to do. I am pointing out that you need to look at your own life and your real-life actions to see if there is a consistency there that you can be proud of, or if there is something you need to change.
.
I wonder how many people understand that the major purpose of the Second Amendment was to keep firearms in the hands of the people so they could violently resist the government should it ever become tryannical? I guess not many, as I never hear anyone mentioning that. Also, the government became tyrannical years ago and "the people" are just smiling and nodding and going along with it.
ReplyDelete"If you don't carry a gun with you as you go about your daily life, you are not living the "keep and bear arms" you claim to support. Your "support" is empty and meaningless."
ReplyDeleteCrap.
A gun is a tool. I don't carry tools that I don't need.
I have a right to speak and assemble, that does not mean that I have to talk all the time or be with other people all the time.
You are mixing a carrying as a right with carrying as a political statement. Doing that only makes our side look and sound stupid.
Ragnar- You'll have to explain further, because maybe I am stupid, but I don't see how your "support" for the right to keep and bear arms is in any way "real" if you don't exercise it.
ReplyDeleteI carry a lot of tools I don't need right at this moment, simply because I never know what the next moment might bring.
Carrying a gun isn't the same as shooting it, which is what your comparison with the right to speech and assembly seems to imply. If you "leave your voice at home", or make it impossible to be around people (whatever that might mean), then your right to free speech or assembly is also meaningless.
If you're gonna carry, carry. Discreetly.
ReplyDeleteBut remember -- if you try to emulate Billy-The-Kid, there'll be a Pat Garrett lurking to take you down. And Garrett will be the hero -- not you.
Temper the north wind by the shorn lamb.
Sam
Ragnar, if you come across a screw that is loose, chances are you can leisurely stroll back to your toolbox, retrieve a screw driver, and screw the screw back in. Same goes for a bolt that needs tightening or a nail that needs nailing.
ReplyDeleteBut if a rapist/robber/tyrant attacks you or yours, don't you think you should have the proper repellant tool with you?
I go about my daily routine with either a S&W Tactical Ops folder or a Leatherman pocket tool, and many is the day when didn't use need to use it. I guess that means I often a carry tool I don't use. But on the other hand it's nice to know they are on my person and available for use should they be needed and on many occasions over the years they have been.
ReplyDeleteI think that I have to disagree. First, the whole idea of having a "right" to do something is little different than obtaining a "permit"-in both cases, the end result-supposedly-is that government will not employ its "justice" system to prevent you from or punish you for doing what you have a "right" to do...
ReplyDeleteSetting that aside, however, the idea that a firearm represents some mystical be-all and end-all of weaponry is absurd. Different situations call for different preparation.
As an example-long ago I worked as a bouncer for many years. The absolute LAST thing I would have wanted to be carrying in that situation was a firearm! The reason is simple, and twofold. First, there is NO way I could have used a firearm in a crowded nightclub without risking the lives of countless innocent people-even if someone pointed a gun at me(that, thankfully never happened..at least not there-I did have knives drawn, and we did have to deal with a couple of drunks with guns...) Why have a weapon you cannot use? Especially because of reason two:
The second reason is simply that bar fights-even simple shoving matches-would often involve physical contact between me and someone who had become violent in a peaceful business. How could I possibly secure a firearm on my person in such a way that Captain Bottle of Jack and My Girl is Kissing That Guy would not both become aware of it, and potentially get a hold of it-while in a half-crazed state? I couldn't think of a way, and still do my job.
Indeed, it should come as no surprise that the most dangerous situation I ever encountered involved the police in the parking lot. There was a fight between several people, one of whom the cops came to arrest...he got his hands on one of the guns(which the rookie cop was not paying much attention to-we had words), and had it halfway out of the holster...I still have a scar on my good arm from where I landed after I tackled him.
I did carry a knife, and took to carrying(illegally)pepper spray for when I was outside. I still often prefer that combination for most situations.
I love guns, own many, and have used them for defense...I don't use them to make political statements, if politics ever requires a firearm(and I pray that it will not), I presume that, as Sam Elliot once said in a movie, "If it gets bad enough that I need a rifle, there'll be plenty of them laying around."
This whole piece seems like a strange sentiment from you, Kent. It reads like you believe that there is some collective responsibility here, which is not not usually something you promote. Perhaps I'm misreading you?
The reactions I have gotten from this have really confused me.
ReplyDeleteMike- I'm not saying you have to carry a gun; I'm saying that if you are a gun owner, yet you don't carry that tool with you, you are not living what you say you believe. If that doesn't bother you, then so be it.
Sure there are situations where there are other tools that are more appropriate. So? Make sure you also keep that in mind and "carry" appropriately. Don't count on the tools you need to magically appear when you need them. It might happen, but more likely it won't.
You can always find a situation to illustrate why you do (or don't do) something- such as your illustration of the rookie cop. I could tell you of many cases where a person died, or failed to protect others, because they thought "There's no way I would need a gun today- not here". You do what you want.
There's nothing collective about examining your own individual life to see if you are following through with what you say you believe. I'm not even saying anyone should carry a gun- I re-read the post to see if I could find that demand anywhere.
I'm not saying that carrying a gun is a political statement (unless you carry into a situation where you know it will be seen by anti-liberty bigots in order to make a point). If you carry concealed it's as "political" as writing an angry letter to a president and hiding it in your desk. It might make you feel better, but it won't affect anyone unless you show it to others. And "politics" is all about other people- so if you ever used a gun in defense, you did make a political statement whether you knew it or not.
But it's not really about politics- it's about personal self-ownership and self-responsibility.
I guess I see it like this: If I were gay, and in a long-term monogamous relationship with The Love of My Life, and said I supported gay marriage, but I refused to marry (in whatever way I defined that ceremony) my partner, I could understand if those "looking in" thought my support for gay marriage was empty and meaningless. Maybe I "support" marriage, but don't believe it's for me. Is that really "support"?
I wonder if those who object "support" the keeping and bearing of arms, but don't believe it's for them.
I suppose it comes down to those who carry and those who don't. Everyone has their own reasons to do what they do. But it sure seems like a case of guilty dogs barking loudest.
I suppose I look at this in a way that perhaps reflects a consistent lack of strict adherence to the principle that I believe in but nevertheless I don't think it betrays the principle. I am a gun owner but don't carry. If i lived in a country that adhered to the principles it supposedly espoused, I probably would carry. Regrettably I know that doing what would be best for my self-defense will be on balance, more likely to result in my detriment than otherwise since in my personal experience I am much more likely to encounter a bullying thug in the employ of the police State I live in than an "unofficial" thug of the plain-clothes variety. On the other hand, one thing I have refused to do most emphatically is to engage in the sycophantic "beg, pay and register" farce better known as LCC. This would most assuredly be a knowing and willful betrayal of my principles and an acknowledgement that by birthright was really just a State granted privilege. Those individuals who have followed this path may be personally safer than I but have done so at the cost of their principles (if any?) and have sold out their fellow citizens rights for their own expediency as I fully expect that before long ONLY they will be acknowledged as "legally" armed.
ReplyDelete"...in my personal experience I am much more likely to encounter a bullying thug in the employ of the police State I live in than an 'unofficial' thug of the plain-clothes variety."
ReplyDeleteI completely agree there. I wonder how much of that is due to "the majority" choosing to not carry. Has the cost of being a thug been reduced to the point that it is almost without consequence? How can that cost be brought back up to its normal levels? Would "universal carry" help?
I don't know the answers.