Opponents argue that gun control, by disarming potential victims, makes it more difficult for them to protect themselves. Supporters reply that since criminals are more experienced in violence than victims, the odds in an armed confrontation are with the criminal. This is probably true but almost entirely irrelevant to the argument.
Suppose one little old lady in ten carries a gun. Suppose that one in ten of those, if attacked by a mugger, succeeds in killing the mugger instead of being killed by him—or shooting herself in the foot. On average the mugger is more likely to win the encounter than the little old lady. But—also on average—every hundred muggings produces one dead mugger. At those odds, mugging is an unprofitable business—not many little old ladies carry enough money to justify one chance in a hundred of being killed getting it. The number of muggers declines drastically, not because they have all been killed but because they have, rationally, sought safer professions.— David Friedman, Hidden Order: The Economics of Everyday Life (via utilitymaximiser)
Congress Can Go Ahead And Ban All Guns
If you haven’t heard, Feinstein introduced the
11th step to fascism new Gun Ban Bill to Congress today. Her stated purpose of the bill, and as I’ve mentioned many times before, is to “dry up the supply of these weapons over time, therefore, there is no sunset on this bill”.
Congress can go ahead and ban whatever they want, the people will find legal ways around it. Just like they did with the bullet button and other innovations, Congress can only build temporary walls because the possibilities of innovation far exceed the ability to limit things. Congress does not have the knowledge or the foresight to ban all things that exist today and that can possibly exist in the future, so it’s only a matter of time until new methods of production are discovered and guns of the same capability and perhaps even greater ability once again, legally, find their way back into the hands of the people.
Heck, this weapons ban might even push for innovations that go beyond physical rounds and traditional guns. Perhaps this will finally bring about the invention of laser guns or powerful air guns or maybe even some other technology that we haven’t even conceived of yet.
Congress is only quasi-capable of legislation but the people are masters of innovation. Like they’ve done before, they will once again legally innovate their way around silly laws that exist through a very narrow and backwards thinking lens.
So I say to Congress, go ahead and ban what you want and watch the people peacefully destroy your position on guns while efficiently bettering their own.
Gun ‘Control’? Control is a myth. What we really need is gun safety and that doesn’t come through legislation. If you truly want gun safety, teach your kids how to properly handle and respect a gun at a young age. Go to the range, practice and, most importantly, always respect the power of the gun.
If you don’t care for actual gun safety, bypass Congress like a dictator, create a bunch of laws to suppress lawful ownership of guns all while working with the DOJ, CIA and groups that you yourself deem as “terrorists” in illegally trafficking “military style” guns all around the world.
If you’ve done the former, you are an upstanding citizen and a responsible member of society. Do the latter and you are the President of the United States of America.— Sha
Joseph Story, United States Supreme Court Justice 1811-1845, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States; With a Preliminary Review of the Constitutional History of the Colonies and States before the Adoption of the Constitution [Boston, 1833]
What the honorable Joseph Story is explaining here is that it is the sole duty of the people to keep themselves both armed and educated on those arms. By educated I mean both in the ability to use such arms and the understand of their importance. However, Story both sees and fears that the ‘burthens’ of those rights (burthens as in burdens) is starting to shift the vigilance and willingness of the people to remain armed.
Joseph Story, in 1833, successfully predicted that the laziness of the people to both stay armed and to keep their own government at bay will soon lead from indifference on gun ownership to disgust and that disgust will become contempt. That contempt will soon remove the protection that the 2nd Amendment provides for all of us, individually and as a nation.
If we haven’t arrived at our final destination yet, we are certainly standing at it’s doorstep with our finger on the doorbell.
Timothy Dwight, Travels in New England and New York, 1823
As I’ve said before, America doesn’t have a gun problem, it has a morality problem. We’ve failed to remain vigilant and educated on both the utility and usage of guns.