Pages

December 30, 2011

Why I Carry


Written almost six years ago, the Munchkin Wrangler delivers a most excellent essay on the utility of firearms in establishing a civil and safe society:

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.



The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society. But, a firearm makes it easier for an armed mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat - it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.


People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal force, watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier, works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply would not work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation--and that's why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

22 comments:

Gorges Smythe said...

One of the best posts on the subject that I've seen in a long time!

Karina said...

La multi ani!
http://karina-lumeanoastra.blogspot.com/2011/12/maxim-vasiliu-plugusorul.html

Woodsterman (Odie) said...

It saves lives.

Subvet said...

Better to have it and not need it rather than need it and not have it.

sig94 said...

Gorges - same here!

sig94 said...

Odie - it is etimated that private citizens use firearms at least a million times a year or more to defend themselves. Many times all they have to do is display the weeapon. It is called DUG - "defensive use of a gun."

sig94 said...

Subvet - the same can be said for nukes, eh?

Tim Shey said...

Freedom To Bear Arms

"Remembering the words of Nehemiah the Prophet: 'The trowel in hand and the gun rather loose in the holster.'"

--T.S. Eliot

Grandma Yellow Hair said...

I agree totally. Being an older woman living alone my gun sleeps with me and I feel better knowing it is there.
After working in law enforcement for over twenty years I have seen some really bad things and we all need to wake up and realize you have to be armed to protect yourself against crazies
Maggie

sig94 said...

Tin Shey - yes sir that's paraphrasing Neh. 4:17.

About 1600 years later during black powder's hey day you were advised to "keep your powder dry."

sig94 said...

Maggie - a very wise thing to do if you don't feel safe. Police do a pretty good job after the perp has done his. I spent too many years cleaning up after thugs.

Kid said...

When they can keep heroin and meth away from 13 year olds after 40 years of the 'war on drugs', then even then I wouldn't believe they could keep guns away from criminals, but that would be the minimum starting point.

I could make a gun in my basement shop.

And what about the government, are they going to disarm?

Mass Murder happens in Gun Free Zones.

Krystal said...

"The rescuers helped turn the Honda Accord upright in the Logan River, and one man shot out the car's window with a handgun and cut a seat belt to help free the children ..." The children would have drowned if this man didn't carry a handgun.

Here's the full story.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/01/utah-river-rescue-bystand_n_1178931.html

Anonymous said...

When seconds count, the Police are only minutes away.

Anonymous said...

It also doesn't hurt to mention that just because the government outlaws guns that doesn't mean a criminal wont have one. In all probibility a criminal will gain a gun illegally regardless of the laws of the area. So taking away our second amendment rights just makes certain that the criminal will be armed and the innocent law abiding citizen will be a sitting duck.

Anonymous said...

When all the hoopla is done, the two constant things the armed citizen can look forward to if they survive the fight for their life is Police brutality (after all they want to be the only ones big enough to carry a gun, not you stupid little sheep),and a nice finacial ruin in the so called justice system. After being around far too many cops in the military and in the guard I can say with all certanty that they feel a dead person on the ground who was unarmed is a true victim, where the criminal being dead and the victim being alive after using a gun, then that person needs to be punished. Cops are the living embodyment of the State, and we all know the State stopped answering to We the People well before the Civil War. As Americans it is our duty to not only challenge the State, but change it back if it doesn't, and it doesn't, suit us anymore.

PoPo said...

Anonymous doesn't know facts. Nothing a street cop likes better than having a decent member of their community defend themselves from being victimized. You are only "stupid little sheep" if you choose to be. I am not the only one "big enough to carry a gun".

MP's in the guard are not usually representative of experienced street cops. Don't confuse the two. Great profession, different tasks.
We are not the embodiment of the state, we are the embodiment of the communities we serve.
"Decent people sleep peacefully at night because hard men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." -Orwell

sig94 said...

Amen PoPo, amen.

Anonymous said...

Wonderfully stated. An observation: Anyone who, through reason or law, encourages me to disarm has the intent or desire to use force against me now or in the immediate future. There is no other alternative.

sig94 said...

ANon - another Amen...

Anonymous said...

If a nation has a right to defend herself, doesn't that right directly transfer to her citizens?? If a gun ban were to TRY and be impossed, do you really think Cops would risk their jobs and high postions to stand up and stop it??? Only if it didn't affect them, and their families.

Anonymous said...

If you believe the police will be there in time to protect you and you live in any decent sized city, here's a test. Call a cop; call a taxi; and call for a pizza. See who gets there first.