The Gun is Civilazation --- interesting read

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by ALSGUN, May 21, 2010.


    ALSGUN New Member

    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)

    So the greatest civilization is one where all citizens are equally armed and can only be persuaded, never forced.
  2. bkt

    bkt New Member

    Very good read, thanks!

  3. pandamonium

    pandamonium New Member

    Leave it to a Marine, no BS straight to the point and you just can't argue with that.
    I have been saying for years that EVERY PERSON should carry a firearm. I strongly believe that said society would be virtually CRIME FREE! I would like to take it one step further and make it mandatory for ALL to be armed. But then you get into freedom of choice issues. But could you imagine, the police stopping someone and demanding to know why they are NOT armed? But then again you wouldn't really need many police around in my "mandatory carry" state. :cool:
  4. Tackleberry1

    Tackleberry1 New Member

    Great Post ALS!

    In my humble opinion, the gun, as a single invention, has had more positive impact on Liberty and Freedom than any other creation of the human mind.

    Prior to the gun, weapons such as swords, bow's, axes, pike's, spears, ect...were the weapons of the elites because they took countless hours, even years to master. The only people who could train enough to become proficient were those hired by the Monarchs to serve the Crown.

    It was the combination of the gun and the unique situation of the British colonist in the New World that for the first time in human history gave the common man the tools to stand his ground against a tyranical Monarch.

    Since our Revolution and despite our warts, The United State of America has been the greatest force of freedom the world has ever know.

    And NONE of it could have happened without the GUN.

    God Bless America!

  5. RadioActiV

    RadioActiV New Member

    Great read very inspirational and true. I'm going to remember the last bit and use that as my argument for why I carry. Not that I don't have my own, that last line just shuts down any ability the other person would have to argue back with you.:D
  6. WannaGator

    WannaGator New Member

    Great Post

    Great Post; too bad most people in our gov't, colleges, and in our society have lost the understanding of this.
  7. Shooter

    Shooter Administrator Staff Member

    Good read. Good post.
  8. CA357

    CA357 New Member Supporter

    Very sensible and quite true.
  9. joshfireart

    joshfireart New Member

    a armed society is a polite society a quote from my dad