A must read
quote:THIS IS THE BEST WORDED PRO-GUN ARGUMENT I HAVE EVER READ
Interesting take and one you don't hear much. . . . . .
Read this eloquent and profound letter and pay close attention to the last paragraph of the letter....
"The Gun Is Civilization" by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)
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.
By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.)
Interesting take and one you don't hear much. . . . . .
Read this eloquent and profound letter and pay close attention to the last paragraph of the letter....
"The Gun Is Civilization" by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)
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.
By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.)
0
-
Smithsonian magazine, Nov 2017.....the next pandemic...info about influenza from the 1918 devastating outbreak to 2018? the next?...and the race to develope a vaccine to help resist its impact...seems the next wave may originate in China where people and their life patterns closer to nature could boil this up...influenza is a shape shifting virus that man has not been able to anticipate what form it will next take....about 105 MILLION died in 1918 ...and about 1/3 that of more recent HIV infection.....all being nasty stuff being so close to humanity that it is not clearly seen....and misdiagnosed 0 -
This was posted on the Politics Forum by Mr. Kaneko and I thought it would receive more readings here.
Quote
A friend of mine wrote this and sent it to his friends. I have always enjoyed reading his experiences and found this particular update moving. I have deleted his name but other that that, no editing on my part.
Greetings,
I know it's been a long time since I've sent one of my updates. Not
much has changed, I'm still living in the DC area and studying theology
fulltime. I thought I'd share a bit about my experience in ministry
this academic year. I actually started writing this in October of
last year but words escaped me - I suppose reflection demands its share
of time.
I wanted to work in a hospice but couldn't find a placement to fit my
schedule. Finally, I landed a position as an intern chaplin at the
National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda MD. Its turned out to be
another one of those "how did I get here?" experiences that I've had
since joining the friars. The combination of wearing a Franciscan
habit with a "Department of Defense" badge just didn't seem right to
me. I didn't know what to expect - the whole "military thing" was
completely new to me. And I knew I would visit soldiers who were
injured in Iraq. It turns out that most of the last five months have
been ministering to those injured in war. There are no shortage of
patients.
To say the reality of the situation is tragic would be an
understatement. I still remember one of the first patients I saw: both
his eyes were gone and the rest of his body wasn't fairing much better.
The expression on his father's face haunts me to this day. I can't
describe it. while I've been with people in times of tragedy this was
different. I will never be a parent so I don't think I'll ever know or
understand what that man was thinking or feeling as he sat at the
bedside of his son. There was an emptiness that I just can't describe.
In fact, the families are a big part of the ministry. Practically all
the injured are in their early 20's. So when they're hurt, parents
leave jobs, brothers and sisters leave school and in some cases wives
come to see their husbands. There's a lot of waiting in hospitals and
so I help people pass the time.
I've heard war stories. I've heard about getting shot at, being blown
up, shooting back, watching your friends die, and killing another
person. War is a matter of life and death and people do things they
wouldn't normally do; it becomes brute survival. Sometimes you make
mistakes. Some of those mistakes have dire consequences. I still can't
get over how young these guys are. The wounds are very deep.
I've seen battle scars. Many (too many) limbs are missing, faces are
deformed, fond pre-war memories have vanished for some, but for others
horrific wartime memories won't go away. Some like show and tell: "I
got shot here, and here, and here, and here, and here." "feel this
piece of shrapnel in my arm." "Are you squeamish?" (they never wait
for an answer) "look at the hole in my thigh, 70% of my leg is gone!"
"see, they took my abdominal muscles out and put them over here."
They're boys, and yet they're men.
I must say many of my stereotypes and prejudices of the military have
been shattered (funny how getting to know people will do that). I've
been impressed by the integrity, compassion, dedication, and commitment
to service that I've witnessed in many of the military personnel. My
experience with injured warriors has reaffirmed my belief that violence
is not the pathway to peace. Some shared very personal and painful
stories with me and for that I will be forever grateful. They have
changed me in ways that I cannot articulate. I had indeed entered the
realm of the sacred.
Chaplin's are valued in the military (there's even folks whose job
description includes guarding the chaplin with their life.) One day I
was in the hall and noticed three men walking opposite me - the guy in
the middle looked "different." I kept walking and figured they'd turn
towards the elevators. But when the man in the middle saw me (it's
impossible to hide when wearing a habit) he started walking towards
me. As he got closer the difference in his uniform became apparent -
along with the number of stars on his collar. He came up to me, shook
my hand firmly and said in a strong voice: "Are you taking care of my
Marines?" I was speechless for a moment and finally said "yes, sir."
"Good", he said, "you're the only one who can help them." I knew he
meant God. This was one of those days (soon after Fallujah) where I
didn't want to walk in that hospital, I remember saying to myself
"maybe I should get a real job". Thanks to the man with all the stars
I was reminded that it's really not about me or my plans. I never
expected to be ministering to warriors - I often think "I should be
doing x,y,z or ministering to so and so" and God says "okay, thanks for
the input, now go here."
Out of all my "update" emails this was by far the most difficult to
write. I started writing this in October and stopped. I was
traumatized. I picked it up again in November when rhetoric, flag
waving, and patriotism were at a fevered pitch. When daily "death
counts" were reported like sports scores (as if God says "oh good USA
15, Iraq 100"). I was angry. I knew there were mangled bodies,
devastated families, and broken hearts "over there." Many soldiers I
spoke with didn't forget that. I wrote in January, the number of
injured exceeded 10,000. I felt overwhelmed. I wrote today and I'm not
even sure what I'm communicating, but I felt compelled to write. So I
did.
May the God of Peace be with you!
Unqoute
volenti non fit injuria0 -
0 -
http://www.explorehuckabee.com/index.cfm?FuseAction=Issues.View&Issue_ID=18
You know I really do not care wheter I am a Dem or a Republican this guy seems good to me. He is the fit for the current congress in my opinion of course feel free to disagree.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
4 comments