Log in

No account? Create an account
Trevor Stone's Journal
Those who can, do. The rest hyperlink.
A Well Armed Populace 
28th-Mar-2010 11:27 pm
bug eyed earl
Gun advocates often suggest that society would be safer if everyone carried[1] a gun, because would-be attackers would think twice about going after an armed target. I was thinking about this, and it seems like the past three hundred years or so featured plenty of countries who started a war, even though the other side had a bunch of guns.

On a similar subject, a national army is really a form of socialized insurance with an opportunity for high risk investments. If the Nazis invade, it's really not efficient to have each citizen expend the resources for self defense; the collective power of a large organization pooling resources from individual contributors is the way to go. So while the Tea Partiers are on the Electric Kool-Aid Antacid Trip across the country complaining bitterly about the government collecting money to provide services to the general populace, perhaps they should take a department that provides lots of cheap health care[2] and education[3].

[1] And knew how to properly use…
[2] The VA's budget is close to $90 billion
[3] Of course, many recipients must first survive a death panel: A room full of guys at the Pentagon who decide which divisions to send to combat zones.
29th-Mar-2010 05:41 am (UTC)
> Gun advocates often suggest that society would be safer if everyone carried[1] a gun,

As an advocate of the right to bear arms, let me say that personally I think that argument is a fat load of horsecrap.
29th-Mar-2010 05:45 am (UTC)
Of course, the simpler argument against it is "Do you really think everyone would be safer if clinically insane people were all armed," but the one above feels like it has more data behind it.
29th-Mar-2010 05:49 am (UTC)
I just feel like there's no good evidence. I mean, it's like saying: "Literacy would rise if everyone knew how to use a printing press." Yes, reading and printing presses somewhat related. No, knowing how to use a printing press not a guarantee of literacy.

It also annoys me when people try and turn a right (which, by very definition, is something you're free to either do or not do, as you personally feel like) into an obligation.
29th-Mar-2010 10:53 am (UTC)
The clinically insane and the drug addicts. Not to mention that if you put in a rule banning the insane, the insane would just not get treated for their insanity so they could have guns.
30th-Mar-2010 12:42 am (UTC)
Wait a minute the clinically insane are running the country, they got nukes ats their disposal, they don't need guns.
30th-Mar-2010 10:38 am (UTC)
If you can't get them committed to the hospital against their will, they are not insane enough. I give you that money and power make it harder to have someone committed against their will. They are not clinically insane, they are eccentric.
This page was loaded Oct 23rd 2018, 8:32 am GMT.