Those who want you to doubt that anarchy (self-ownership and individual responsibility) is the best, most moral, and ethical way to live among others are asking you to accept that theft, aggression, superstition, and slavery are better.
KentForLiberty pages
- KentForLiberty- Home
- My Products for sale
- Zero Archation Principle
- Time's Up flag
- Real Liberty
- Libertarianism
- Counterfeit "laws"
- "Taxation"
- Guns
- Drugs
- National Borders
- My views
- Political Hierarchy
- Preparations
- Privacy & ID
- Sex
- Racism
- The War on Terror
- My Books
- Videos
- Liberty Dictionary
- The Covenant of Unanimous Consent
Saturday, April 13, 2024
New laws aren't ethical solution
“If you could have only one gun…”
I would keep more than one gun, anyway.
What does “could have” mean?
Does it mean the Rulers say it’s not allowed? They aren’t going to stop at limiting you to one. Next, they'll say the allowed number is zero. Ignore and defy them.
Does it mean I’m nomadic and too weak to carry two guns? Then I’m too weak to carry ammo so I’m doomed anyway. I’ll keep multiple guns and dig in.
Does it mean I had to trade all the other guns for water? Why not trade game meat instead? Or trade security services?
Does it mean I migrated to Mars and the weight limit for the trip kept me from carrying more than one? Keep two lighter-weight guns. Again, ammo is going to be the real problem here.
I think "if you could have only one gun" is meaningless except as a way to decide which gun is your favorite. If it's your favorite you'll find a way to justify keeping that one.