I saw a "progressive liberal" (his words) claim that government and guns are both just tools. If you can be anti-government, you can be anti-gun. This was in the context of claiming that libertarians could be anti-gun (by which he implied they could support anti-gun legislation, not just have a personal preference).
There are a couple of problems with this.
The government he described is not merely a government, but a state. A political government. States are not defensive. You can't use a state for defense without harming the innocent-- "collateral damage". I recently saw another statist-- a "conservative" one-- claim that this is just because states-- political governments-- are a "necessary evil".
He then posted a link to an essay describing how civilizations and societies form and grow, not realizing that society is the opposite of the state.
Bad guys will use a gun or a state to violate others. A good guy will only use a gun defensively and will accept responsibility if he inadvertently harms the innocent in the process. A good guy can't use a state without harming the innocent, and wouldn't be able to pay restitution to all those he harmed by doing so anyway. So, would he use a state at all? If he does, can he still be considered a good guy?
Trying to use a state defensively will fail because it can't be aimed, it doesn't hit what you're aiming at even if you try, people are forced to pay for this tool and ammunition against their will, and it is "illegal" to defend yourself from those using a state against you. It's like using a nuclear bomb to get rid of a smattering of Nazis in a city. It might work, but only an idiot would believe it's the right thing to do.
-
Please support the Tobbles Memorial Cat & Kitten Rescue Project on Patreon
Since you're on the topic of guns, did you see the tape of the cops at the Uvalde school shooting and how they behaved? They were heavily armed and had bullet resistant vests, but ran away at the sound of gunfire. There were a couple hundred of them and only one shooter.
ReplyDeleteIt gets better. one cop paused to sanitize his hands. Another stopped to check his smart phone. The London Daily Mail did a critical article on it, most of the American press is downplaying it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11024901/Identity-Uvalde-officer-dubbed-hand-sanitizer-cop-REVEALED.html
It has become so hard to fire a bad cop. Can that be changed?
I did see that. And did you see the "Punisher" on that cop's phone? I guess he's just a wannabe.
DeleteI was saying years ago that cops are cowards. http://kentforliberty.com/2013/10/cops-are-cowards.html
It's why they enforce anti-gun legislation.
The reason it's so hard to fire a bad cop is that there would be no cops left, and the state and its faithful don't want that.