Have you asked yourself these questions? Part one.
How did you form your current opinions? People like being right more than they like being wrong. Is it good to win a debate even though you are wrong? It may be good for you sometimes. You may think you can not afford to lose face in a certain situation. But if you convince people to vote for a politician because you "know" he will do a good job you could be in trouble. Especially if you helped elect a totalitarian. You managed to convince people, but did it do any good?
It's actually good to find out when you're wrong. Then you can stop being wrong. This text is about firearm-related problems. I'm interested in minimizing these. Therefore I have thought about the problems and what can be done to reduce them. I have come to the conclusion that firearms for self-defense purposes should be allowed. I have come to this view by asking myself certain questions.
I will not change my opinion without answers to the questions I have and you should not change your opinion without answering your questions. Not even statistics related to weapons and crime can change my mind. Statistics are usually used by both sides of the debate because it can be skewed to fit both sides. I will ask a few questions. I will develop my thoughts on these questions to the best of my ability so that it is clear how I think. If I'm wrong, please explain how.
Generally, people prefer not being shot over being shot. You can agree on that whether you are for or against the right to bear arms. There are problems with firearms, namely that people can be shot and threatened by people with firearms. Accidents can occur. Some also consider that firearms are problematic because they can be used for suicide. I do not think that this is a problem that has to do with firearms. Even if you eliminate firearms as an alternative to suicide, there are still lots of other methods.
Questions for people thinking about whether banning firearms is good or bad.
- Why do some people want to ban grown-up mentally sane people from having guns for self-defense?
- If adult people who are mentally sane aren't allowed to take responsibility for themselves, then who will be responsible for them? Who does not fit into the above group?
- What are the reasons for the prohibition of firearms?
- How will you maintain the firearm ban and try to solve the problems that can be caused by firearms without creating unwanted problems?
- What are the risks of introducing a firearm ban?
- What is the root of the problems, what are the symptoms and how should the problems be addressed?
- Can you achieve a situation wherein no one gets shot? If yes, what price do you have to pay?
- Do gun ban advocates propose a violent or non-violent solution?
I intend to develop my thoughts on these questions in future posts. Do you think I should add or change any question?
If adults aren't allowed to take responsibility for themselves, are they really adults? Do gun ban advocates propose a violent or non-violent solution?
I will touch on the first question in a future post and I will add the second one. Thank you! :)
Sure, like the war on drugs gun laws are the tyrants trying to monopolize power.. Ban guns and only criminals and corporate governments (criminals) will have them. Guns can help balance power even with larger weapons (many smaller weapons to fewer larger weapons). The larger a weapon the more public and decentralized its control needs to be and therefore more smaller weapons will be needed .. Go Ghost Gunner ..
You never need to use a gun to be effective. In contrast I'll do a full 180 here. Using a gun is the worst thing you can do against a powerful adversary. That is attacking where they are strongest. Having a gun and using a gun are two very different things. Even in self defense there is a fine line. It is a line we must learn though if we are to increase our health and freedom.
I will talk about the decentralizing aspect of gun ownership in a future post. If I understand you correctly it is preferable to have a gun and know how to use it but keep it in the holster? I agree with that. Off course there comes a time when self-defense is your best option. Thanks for commenting!
James, PLEASE brother reconsider your delegation to kokesh. The man supposedly has ~14k followers but doesn't even get a comment on his blog.
Example HERE
There are WAYYY better steemians you can delegate your SP to. He's even powering down after @thejohalfiles donated a SHIT TON of Steem to him a few months ago when he got arrested.
There are only two means by which men can deal with one another: guns or logic. Force or persuasion. Those who know that they cannot win by means of logic, have always resorted to guns. ~ Ayn Rand
Thanks for the Rand quote, she said a lot of good things.
Good article.
Thank you!
Good article.
To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.
Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.
Congratulations! This post has been upvoted from the communal account, @minnowsupport, by Pomperipossa from the Minnow Support Project. It's a witness project run by aggroed, ausbitbank, teamsteem, theprophet0, someguy123, neoxian, followbtcnews, and netuoso. The goal is to help Steemit grow by supporting Minnows. Please find us at the Peace, Abundance, and Liberty Network (PALnet) Discord Channel. It's a completely public and open space to all members of the Steemit community who voluntarily choose to be there.
If you would like to delegate to the Minnow Support Project you can do so by clicking on the following links: 50SP, 100SP, 250SP, 500SP, 1000SP, 5000SP.
Be sure to leave at least 50SP undelegated on your account.
Post no. two https://steemit.com/philosophy/@pomperipossa/have-you-asked-yourself-these-questions-part-two#comments
-Children and those who are not mentally fit.
Thanks for your answers. You seem to have given this topic a lot more thought than most people. My hope is that this series of texts and the comments on them will help a few more people to think about it.
sadly its hard to break through irrationality with rationality.
Sad indeed.