Political foo: guns and liberty

[alpharaposa]

In the last year, I have finally become firmly convinced that the only way to both protect the population from terrorism and preserve liberty at home is this: the populace (generally speaking) must be armed, competent, and confident.

To do nothing is suicide. To place it all in the hands of the State is to yield our liberties and our adult responsibilities.

Abroad, it is a different matter. However, we should be ready to protect our own homes. If we are not, then there is no basis of arguing against draconian anti-terrorist measures that get written into our laws other than willfully ignoring the danger.

And I'm not saying that the government should do nothing with regards to terrorism at home. It has its job. But if we want to be able to tell it it has limits, then we, as a people, should be willing to fill in those gaps.

Comments

[prester-scott.livejournal.com]

Those guys who wrote the Second Amendment, they weren't so dumb, were they?

But we have completely abandoned their wisdom, not so much in that we don't have guns anymore (because, numerous infringements notwithstanding, obviously we do), but because the People are not a militia anymore.

[aefenglommung.livejournal.com]

I'm not big on militias. The National Guard suits me just fine. The idea of some of the goobers I know drilling on the town green to defend our homes just boggles my mind.

[prester-scott.livejournal.com]

Why? They're the same sorts of goobers who have fought in every war this country has ever had. If we gave the goobers some sense of pride and responsibility, maybe they wouldn't be quite as gooberish.

[the-brad.livejournal.com]

Just to let you know I'm not completely left, I absolutely agree with this.