Liberty vs. Security

[JohnStOnge]

So we had a school massacre and guns were involved. The expectation is that the people will now clamor for some dramatic change; to "do something" so that "we make sure that nothing like this happens again." Our culture has become like that.

But, you know, if you allow Liberty you allow risk. If what we want is minimal risk of people doing bad things to each other...if that is our top priority...the thing to do is establish a totalitarian regime and get rid of the concept of rights, such as the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure, designed to protect our LIberty.

And I think that's direction in which our culture is evolving. There is a persistent mentality holding that it's OK to take steps that whittle away at Liberty and the right to keep government out of our faces "if it keeps us safe."

To me those who defend the second Amendment make a mistake in effectively accepting the premise that it's all about what "keeps us safe." The argument should not be about whether or not having a right to keep and bear arms results in a higher murder rate or a greater likelihood of things like school massacres. It should be about the principle mentioned above: Risk is the price of Liberty and I am willing to pay that price.

To me we shouldn't even be talking about saying that one person who will never hurt anybody should be denied the right to own firearms because of the risk that other people will use firearms to commit crimes; especially when it's clear that the overwhelming majority of persons who own firearms never use them to harm or threaten anyone else.

Banning firearms would not make risk go away. It might reduce the risk of certain types of incidents. But things will happen and the mentality behind the desire to ban private ownership of firearms in general or firearms of any particular type (as in "semiautomatic assault weapons) will result in simply moving on the next thing; pushing the anti-Liberty envelope farther in the name of "keeping us safe." It will never end unless we draw a clear line saying that it's not all about reducing risk. We must reject the idea that "saving lives" automatically justifies government action.

[BlueHen86]

Banning guns isn't the answer. As I said in another thread, we didn't ban airplanes after 9/11.

We can try and keep guns out the hands of nuts, but that is hard to do because you never know when someone is going to snap. We have to accept the fact that bad things will happen no matter what we do, we can't prevent every possible situation.

As far as schools are concerned: I don't think I would want every teacher in a school carrying a weapon, but we should consider having a few school admin's carry. Arm them and give them proper training and the next time something like this happens maybe the shooter is stopped before he gets into a classroom.

[Chizzang]

In a culture founded on violence
expanded and globalized on violence / why in the world would we pretend this is some big surprise..?
And all of a sudden (Right now) we need to do something

About every three years somebody goes on a shooting spree and kills a dozen or so people in this country
These events are just part of the America landscape now

The shooting spree: Americas violent pop culture phenomenon

[houndawg]

In a culture founded on violence
expanded and globalized on violence / why in the world would we pretend this is some big surprise..?
And all of a sudden (Right now) we need to do something

About every three years somebody goes on a shooting spree and kills a dozen or so people in this country
These events are just part of the America landscape now

The shooting spree: Americas violent pop culture phenomenon

Very reminiscent of "muckers" in the 1968 SF classic Stand on Zanzibar

[houndawg]

The thing that nobody seems to be noticing here is that any talk of gun control is merely an academic exercise. There are 100,000,000 weapons out there and there is no way that they can be collected. The barn door is open and that horse is long gone.

And frankly, I don't want to hear about gun control from the planet's biggest arms supplier. Who sells serious weaponry to some of the planets ugliest dictators.

Don't need me no religion to cling to here in the midwest, just my riot gun.

[bluehenbillk]

The thing that nobody seems to be noticing here is that any talk of gun control is merely an academic exercise. There are 100,000,000 weapons out there and there is no way that they can be collected. The barn door is open and that horse is long gone.

And frankly, I don't want to hear about gun control from the planet's biggest arms supplier. Who sells serious weaponry to some of the planets ugliest dictators.

Don't need me no religion to cling to here in the midwest, just my riot gun.

Good point. You bring up three good points.

1- Any kind of gun control right now is almost symbolic.

2- Nobody is, or very few people, are suggesting that the government is going to go around and confiscate hundreds of thousands of weapns.

3- We as Americans are the biggest hypocrites in the world on the subject. Iraq, Libya, Syria, North Korea, etc, who are we to tell other countries what they can & can't do when we're out of control relative to the rest of the world anyway. We're like the fat kid telling someone with a 25BMI they need to go on a diet.

[BlueHen86]

The thing that nobody seems to be noticing here is that any talk of gun control is merely an academic exercise. There are 100,000,000 weapons out there and there is no way that they can be collected. The barn door is open and that horse is long gone.

And frankly, I don't want to hear about gun control from the planet's biggest arms supplier. Who sells serious weaponry to some of the planets ugliest dictators.

Don't need me no religion to cling to here in the midwest, just my riot gun.

Any talk of gun control right now is politically motivated. At worst, the end result will be some silly law which doesn't really do anything. Maybe we will ban phasers.

[bluehenbillk]

Any talk of gun control right now is politically motivated. At worst, the end result will be some silly law which doesn't really do anything. Maybe we will ban phasers.

Phasers? You mean like in Star Trek? What if they're set to stun?

[BlueHen86]

Any talk of gun control right now is politically motivated. At worst, the end result will be some silly law which doesn't really do anything. Maybe we will ban phasers.

Phasers? You mean like in Star Trek? What if they're set to stun?

That's okay, as long as you aren't wearing a red shirt on away missions.

[AZGrizFan]

Phasers? You mean like in Star Trek? What if they're set to stun?

That's okay, as long as you aren't wearing a red shirt on away missions.

Those poor, nameless fucks.

[HI54UNI]

The thing that nobody seems to be noticing here is that any talk of gun control is merely an academic exercise. There are 100,000,000 weapons out there and there is no way that they can be collected. The barn door is open and that horse is long gone.

And frankly, I don't want to hear about gun control from the planet's biggest arms supplier. Who sells serious weaponry to some of the planets ugliest dictators.

Don't need me no religion to cling to here in the midwest, just my riot gun.

Any talk of gun control right now is politically motivated. At worst, the end result will be some silly law which doesn't really do anything. Maybe we will ban phasers.

This! This is how we ended up with the TSA.

[Chizzang]

This! This is how we ended up with the TSA.

Whoa... there
You're talking about AZ's greatest American president right there

[death dealer]

I can go to a store a mile from my house tomorrow morning, buy a simple .22-250 varmint rifle, take it to a gunsmith I know about fifteen miles from there, and by Friday morning or earlier if I'm willing to pay enough, he can make it fully auto and even equip it with a suppressor. Or I can just take one of the many I already own and do the same.

Safety is an illusion. So is Liberty.