1. Are you a current member with account or password issues?

    Please visit following page for more information

    Dismiss Notice

Interesting artical: The gun is civilization.

Discussion in 'Handguns' started by jda, Dec 18, 2010.

  1. jda

    jda Loaded Pockets

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Messages:
    1,278
    Likes Received:
    1,218
    Found this artical floating around the web:

    The Gun is Civilization
    By Marko Kloos

    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, because a firearm makes it easier for a [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 wouldn't 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.

    So the greatest civilization is one where all citizens are equally armed and can only be persuaded, never forced.
     
  2. 50ft-trad

    50ft-trad Loaded Pockets

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Messages:
    588
    Likes Received:
    2
    Or shot first then robbed.
    Or face two or three guns to their one (multiple assailants).

    I've no issues with gun carry where it's legal. I can understand the arguement of force equalizer. I do get anoyed though with totalitarian arguements though (both those that call for universal armament and those that call for universal disarmament). The world is not that simple, and anyone who tells you their way is the only way (irrespective of topic) is not to be trusted IMHO.

    Not jumping down your throat jda, just what I think of Marko Kloos' and his blinkered views.
    Thanks for posting, interesting read
     
  3. bushidomosquito

    bushidomosquito Removed from forum.

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    341
    Likes Received:
    104
    Yeah, I know what you mean. I found out that people occasionally die in car accidents even if they do wear their seat belts so I quit wearing mine. And I heard about this thing over here in California (that's like our England) called a natural gas explosion that blasted like 15 houses to bits and all those people spent good money on smoke detectors and 9V batteries and it didn't do them a bit of good. I pulled those stupid things off my ceiling as soon as I hear about that.
     
  4. grayman

    grayman Loaded Pockets

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2010
    Messages:
    1,899
    Likes Received:
    1,433
    Equalize the prey with the predator and the predator starts hunting in packs......However, you give the prey a fighting chance as strength in numbers does not always guarantee a win.
     
  5. 50ft-trad

    50ft-trad Loaded Pockets

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Messages:
    588
    Likes Received:
    2
    LOL - I expected someone to post a reply like this, and disregard the rest of my post.
    Thanks for not disappointing me :-D
     
  6. Valerian

    Valerian Tea-powered admin

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    6,266
    Likes Received:
    2,018
    And so it all comes down to seeing who's the fastest draw, right? If he has a gun in his hand and yours is still in the holster, sure as heck he can force you.
     
  7. Monocrom

    Monocrom Loaded Pockets

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2009
    Messages:
    8,035
    Likes Received:
    8,227
    You're ignoring the fact that many criminals are basically lazy cowards. Gun in hand . . . "Okay! Do as I say or I'll shoot you!"

    Then he realizes that once he shoots, he's going to get gunned down by other armed citizens nearby. Oops! Time to find a different lazy way of getting money for nothing.

    In America, the cities with the lowest crime rates are the ones with the least restrictive firearms laws.
     
  8. Valerian

    Valerian Tea-powered admin

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    6,266
    Likes Received:
    2,018
    Provided there are any. And even if there are, people are generally not inclined to get involved in other people's woes, especially if means risking lives and/or lawsuits.
     
  9. Narcosynthesis

    Narcosynthesis Loaded Pockets

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,881
    Likes Received:
    1,212
    Certainly arming everyone puts everyone initially on even footing, but people will find ways to weight situations in their favour which then leaves us with the same situation, just much bigger consequences of any actions.

    When you get stopped initially, you first have the imbalance of their gun being drawn and readied, versus you having to draw. If you get stopped by a group and pull a gun in defence, you again have the problem of them being readied in advance, and now also the force of numbers - even if you could take down one attacker, what is the chance of you taking down three or more without ending up looking like a colander?

    In this world there will always be people trying to take advantage of them, and the only result of a mass move to protect ourselves if a change in how the bad guys work to take us down...

    Please don't take this as an anti-gun comment either, just playing devils advocate and pointing out that it won't be as clear cut as the article makes it seem, though I certainly do agree that an armed population will definitely have some effect - while there will still be the hardened criminals out there uncaring about taking lives and willing to risk it, I would also expect a decrease in the lower level crimes by all the people who work off scaring people, and who wouldn't have the balls against a better prepared and armed population (right now you mug someone and there is a small chance your target may be armed and fight back, imcrease the percentage of armed people and it becomes a much riskier way to make some easy money...).
     
  10. Monocrom

    Monocrom Loaded Pockets

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2009
    Messages:
    8,035
    Likes Received:
    8,227
    Nowadays they are not, that's true. But the article suggests a major change to society. Here's another one to go along with the first . . . Change the law so decent folks no longer have to worry about getting sued for doing the right thing. Either by a violent criminal who survived getting shot, or by his low-life family members who are happy he's dead but want to cash in anyway.
     
  11. Valerian

    Valerian Tea-powered admin

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    6,266
    Likes Received:
    2,018
    Well, if we are going to indulge in such flights of fancy, why go to all that trouble with guns, why not just magic away crime?
     
  12. Boy SureFire

    Boy SureFire May The Bridges I Burn Light The Way

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2009
    Messages:
    2,586
    Likes Received:
    77
    "I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid"

    These topics always blow-up. We as humans started out with clubs for tools/weapons, yet even with the passage of so much time we still fall back on our primitive thinking. It would appear we shall never be a truly civilized world until each person can threaten his/her neighbor into submission with a Suitcase Nuclear Weapon... You call it force equalization now, but I call it a Nuclear Holocaust in the making. I like guns too, but there's only so much one can accomplish with such primitive thinking. We've long surpassed the days of using primitive language BTW.... Civilization has advanced, but nothing's changed.
     
  13. jehan60188

    jehan60188 Loaded Pockets

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2009
    Messages:
    1,789
    Likes Received:
    10
    new and exciting
     
  14. VinnyP
    • In Omnia Paratus

    VinnyP Loaded Pockets

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    612
    Likes Received:
    112

    It's doesn't really tell us much as the highest (St. Louis) is not as far as I know too restrictive. Of course city is a relative term; taking large cities over half a million people the safest are in Hawaii and California. Most dangerous are in Michigan Tenessee and Maryland. And this is not even allowing for weapons offences in states where it would not be illegal in the permissive states.
     
  15. attorneyadrian

    attorneyadrian Loaded Pockets

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Messages:
    517
    Likes Received:
    8
    Post deleted (author opened mouth without use of brain first)
     
  16. bushidomosquito

    bushidomosquito Removed from forum.

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    341
    Likes Received:
    104
    It's not just about the gun laws in any given state. Of course cities with large amounts of poor people are going to have higher crime rates whatever state they may be in. The underlying issue is the concept that I can decide what items you may own and have on your person because of my own irrational fears of what you may do with those items. Add to that concept of the everpresent politician that that will use those irrational fears to give the illusion that they are really looking out for you and that's where you get gun laws. If you have a ball point pen in your pocket and I insist that you not be allowed to have it because you just can't be trusted to not jab it into my ear then guess which one of us is crazier. You for having it or me for being afraid of it?
     
  17. VinnyP
    • In Omnia Paratus

    VinnyP Loaded Pockets

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    612
    Likes Received:
    112
    I heard that too but New York is well below average, Boston is better than Houston and lots more liberal cities, and half that of Detroit. Philly isn't great but still Detroit and St Louis have over one and half times the violent crime and it's better than Memphis Cleveland and Kansas City about the same as Miami. Wisconsin is even better and a lot better than a lot of the liberal gun law cities of the same size eg Tulsa Nashville etc whilst having really strict gun control. I don't think the evidence supports either argument convincingly but it slightly favours the more control = less violent crime especially after you factor in the less criminal statutes in the more permissive states.
     
  18. seeker_two

    seeker_two Loaded Pockets

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2009
    Messages:
    32
    Likes Received:
    0
    As someone who knows Mr. Kloos, I can tell you that he isn't pushing for gov't to require that everyone have a gun. He's pushing for the position that everyone should have the choice of having a gun. If you don't want one, fine. But no person or gov't should choose whether or not another person (like myself) should have or not have a gun (or any other SD weapon) on my person. That's what liberty is all about.

    I make my choice every day....how about you?
     
  19. VinnyP
    • In Omnia Paratus

    VinnyP Loaded Pockets

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    612
    Likes Received:
    112
    I fear no sensible responsible person with a gun or whatever they might carry.

    I fear the irresponsible and dangerous no matter what they have, but I think I fear them more with a gun than a biro. I don't accept the absolute argument that no one should tell you what you can or can't carry. We do partly elect governments to tell us what we can and can't do so long as it's sensible.

    A biro, keys or a bottle can be dangerous, if abused, but they have far more legitimate purposes. It would be disproportionate and unfair to prevent the responsible from carrying them just to prevent their abuse. I think handguns and weapons are not automatically the same; the argument that the benefits of their carriage by the responsible, outweigh their abuse by the irresponsible is not so clear cut. I hope you would not be comfortable if anyone who wanted to went around with an explosive vest or carrying biological weapons, some feel the same about guns, it's not about whether you allow everything or nothing the debate is where to draw the line.
     
  20. Monocrom

    Monocrom Loaded Pockets

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2009
    Messages:
    8,035
    Likes Received:
    8,227
    What exactly is so fanciful about changing laws to make it easier for decent citizens to carry firearms, along with making it difficult to sue someone who clearly had to defend himself or others? Nothing magical or mystical about those two measures.