This article was printed from KeepAndBearArms.com.
For more gun- and freedom-related information, visit
http://www.KeepAndBearArms.com.
----------------------------------------------------------------
|
(C) 2000,
William A. Levinson Robert A. Heinlein wrote that an armed society
is a polite society. The common perception is that armed societies were polite
because an act of rudeness might evolve into a duel, as portrayed in Dumas' The
Three Musketeers. The real reason, though, is the mindset and psychology
that come with responsible weapon ownership. The knight's sword was a symbol
of his duty to protect weaker members of society and behave chivalrously, e.g.
with respect and courtesy to women, elderly people, and so on. The sword was the
soul of the Japanese samurai, a constant reminder of the samurai's duty and code
of behavior. The sword was a symbol of taking responsibility, not only
for one's self, but usually for others. If you don't like cops (or armed citizens), the
next time you're in danger-- call a hippie! (Or a Million Mom Marcher) The modern American who buys a firearm for
self-protection is saying, "I recognize that life involves danger, and by
owning a weapon I accept my responsibility to protect myself and those who are
entitled to my protection-- my wife/husband, children, parents, and perhaps
friends and neighbors." An American who shoots at targets for
recreation is practicing a form of self-discipline similar to kyudo
(Japanese archery). If you are attacked by a criminal, it is the person with the
armed-citizen mindset who is more likely to call the police. If you're in a car
accident, this is the person who is more likely to stop and give first aid if
possible, or else call an ambulance for you. The antigun activist is likely to
look the other way, like the New Yorkers did when Kitty Genovese was stabbed to
death. They didn't want to get involved, not even to the extent of picking up a
telephone. More recently, a cab driver was attacked and robbed in the presence
of dozens of New Yorkers, of whom not one called the police. You could probably
bleed to death on a New York sidewalk while dozens of people walked past; these
are the same people who parade in the Million Mom March and elect mayors and
governors who enact handgun bans.
Many antigun activists are saying, "I do
not want to recognize that life involves danger. I deserve to live in a
protected environment, and I should not have to think about protecting myself,
my spouse, my parents, my children, or my neighbors. This is the 21st century,
and violence simply should not happen." It's the same mindset that went
with the "ban the Bomb" movements of the 1970s and 1980s; they wanted
to legislate the Bomb out of existence and pretend that nuclear war couldn't
(and can't) happen. The mice voted to put a bell on the cat so they'd be safe.
It all goes with dodging and avoiding responsibility, and the moral (and often
physical) cowardice that goes with this mindset. Placing responsibility for
violence on the inanimate object (the gun or the Bomb) instead of on people goes
with it.
Consider Rosie O'Donnell, who has a
bodyguard to protect her and her family. Maybe she wants to delegate the
physical risks to an employee, or maybe she doesn't want to endanger her nail
polish with a steel trigger guard. Ted Kennedy has, or had, an armed bodyguard.
I'm sure this rich man's rich boy who never did a lick of honest work in his
entire worthless life would not want to touch anything made of steel, whether it
be a household tool or a weapon; that is what servants are for. Chinese
mandarins grew their fingernails long as proof that they did not have to fight
or do any work; that is probably why there are no mandarins today. Here's the
problem with all those bodyguards and rent-a-cops that are so popular with our
"beautiful people"/ celebrity/ limousine liberal aristocrat class.
Machiavelli's The Prince says that you cannot pay a man enough to make
him willing to die for you. That security person is not going to put his
life in serious danger to protect you, your spouse, or your child-- and if
you're unwilling to do that, why should he? Why the pro-Second Amendment side will win:
Xenophon Heinlein also defined a gentleman as one who
would rather be a dead lion than a live louse (or rabbit). It is really easier,
though, to be a live lion than a live rabbit. Xenophon's The Persian
Expedition says, "...the people whose one aim is to keep alive usually
find a wretched and dishonorable death, while the people who, realizing that
death is the common lot of all men, make it their endeavor to die with honor,
somehow seem more often to reach old age and to have a happier life when they
are alive." So it is with antigun activists and gun rights supporters. The
former seek safety in ineffective laws and "this is how the world ought to
be," and they find no safety; the latter look to themselves for security,
and they are secure. Xenophon's Ten Thousand heeded his advice and most came
safely home to Greece. Ronald Reagan and George Bush won the Cold War, not by
trying to ban the Bomb, but by looking it in the face. We, the supporters of
the Second Amendment, are Xenophon's disciples, and that is why we will
win; the lions will beat the rabbits every time. |
||||||||