“Safety” versus Liberty

There’s something that’s been on my mind lately. It bugs me so much that it inspired me to finally make my comeback at blogging. As we near the November elections, there are a lot of issues, of course, that bug me, but this particular one gets to the heart of many of those others, as well. And I’ll get to those in subsequent posts.

But here it is: I can’t wrap my mind around why anyone would advocate for strict gun control. Well, I can, but not why it would be any sane citizen concerned for his or her own safety. You see, there is a very simple principle that should be common sense, but apparently eludes most people. That principle is that each and every individual is ultimately responsible for his own safety and welfare. Period.

In light of all these recent mass murders, from Tucson to Aurora to the Sikh temple in Wisconsin, gun control advocates have been screeching for tighter gun laws. Now, I could go into a detailed account of how someone with a gun could have taken down the Aurora shooter, or list the number of attempted massacres have been foiled by armed citizens, or I could even list the number of times atrocities have been committed by the government on an unarmed citizenry. I could list the crime rates in cities with strict gun control (D.C., Chicago) versus cities with low gun control (just about anywhere in Texas or Arizona). But all of that has been done already.

Instead I’m going to focus on something our founders understood very well because it’s the very reason America was born: we live in a flawed world full of flawed, corrupt people, and no matter how well-intentioned the individuals, humanity has a long history of oppression, conquest, and violence. Every single civilization in history has been born of conquest or war, has been plagued with violence, and everyone on earth, including elected (and unelected) officials, is flawed. Humans are programmed to abuse authority and to control other humans when given the chance. It’s not a matter of whether it will happen. It will happen. Just look at any work of literature, fiction or non-fiction, and you will find that a common theme is the tragic flaw and the tendency to exploit others. It’s a part of being human. Therefore every person must have the ability and freedom to defend himself from this flawed world. This is the core of the Second Amendment.

Given this truth, why would anyone in their right mind allow or encourage a government to pass laws limiting or eliminating their ability to fight back? Can you say lambs to the slaughter? I don’t know if the advocating of gun control is born of fear, immaturity, laziness, apathy, or what. Or maybe we have been brainwashed into thinking that law enforcement and government always will do (or know) what’s best for us.  Let’s get real, folks. Calling the police and expecting them to arrive, assess the situation, and stop a gunman before lives are lost is a total cop-out (pun intended.) And what happens when the same police and their bosses realize they can point the gun at you with impunity because, um, you illegally sold someone a 32 oz. soda? After all, no matter how “well-intentioned,” they are flawed humans, just like you, me, and the crazy joker gunman.  I’m not slamming the police. They do their best and are brave individuals. But they, and the people who make the laws they enforce, are human and vulnerable to the same oppressive tendencies and flaws as the rest of us.

Ever see the show Deadwood? Or just about anything about the Old West or South? Ever notice the way they spoke to each other? Very civil and genteel. Yes sir, no ma’am. Why do you think that is? Because every last citizen was armed to the teeth. People knew that if you did not treat people with respect and civility, you could find yourself in real trouble. An armed citizenry commands respect. People also knew that if you did find yourself in trouble in a place where vast amounts of land and low populations meant that the Sherriff wasn’t exactly going to be handy in a moment’s notice, you had to know how to defend yourself, or you were dead. It’s no different in modern times. Even today I find that in places in the West and South where people are more likely to be armed, civility tends to be higher and crime rates lower. Can’t say the same for New York, Boston, and Chicago, where people pride themselves on being “blunt” but are really just rude. It makes sense that someone who likes to go around being “blunt” would be likely to screech for more gun control. Usually the rudest and most violent people are the biggest cowards, trying to make sure no one else can stand up to them. Just try breaking into many houses in Texas, where not only are people armed but the law says we can shoot anyone that trespasses on our property.

Benjamin Franklin is famous for his assertion that, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

I can tell you who’s going to be rounded up first the day some crazy, flawed (but well-intentioned, snicker) federal government entity turns on the citizens. It’s the sheeple in the big cities with those awesome gun control laws (New York, San Francisco, Chicago, D.C.)

Those people who can shoot back are going to be a very different story. Just sayin’…