 |
|
|
 THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE Number 704, January 6, 2013 "It is perhaps a bit late, but individuals who value civilization are beginning to act."
Send Letters to editor@ncc-1776.org
Predictions I'm going to go out on a limb. Given the number of people who own semi automatic copies of assault rifles, main battle rifles, semiauto fighting shotguns, and semi auto copies of submachineguns; and given the number of other weapons the gun banners are after, there will be armed resistance to any attempt to enforce a ban. I am willing to bet that between 800,000 and a million people, including me like as not, will get killed trying to enforce the ban in question, and very possibly a civil war started. I get a suspicion more kids will be killed in this fighting than it will ever save. Hopefully, we won't find out if I'm right. I don't feel like getting killed and I don't feel like seeing my country wrecked in a civil war. I don't want to see ten kids killed to save one kid's life. And I don't like being under the power of people who have not considered these probabilities and further more won't bother to by all appearances. A.X. Perez
[ Al, I predict the Age of Stupid-People In Charge is about to come to a just and well-deserved End. I know this is hard to believe, since most of history shows Stupid-People running things for their own personal benefit. It is past time for that to stop.—Editor ] Was that worth reading? Re: Predictions (above) I will never sacrifice the freedom of everyone in order to give a false illusion of safety to one, or a dozen, or a million. There is no such thing as safety. As someone very wise once said, it is as unsafe today as it was 10000 years ago, and will be 10000 years from now. The only difference is what is the danger you are looking out for. The danger of dying from a sabretooth tiger bite is non-existant these days. As is the danger of having your spaceship holed by Tholian Quantum Missiles. Danger changes, but is always there. Governments simply use a current danger to justify increasing tyranny. Nothing more. And nothing less. As I have said before, once you answer the question "Why do you need to have a ______" you have already lost the argument if the answer is anything other than "I do not have to justify my rights." You have let THEM define the argument, set the terms by which you can respond, and set the bar for a limitation of some kind upon your rights. Neale Osborn
Was that worth reading? Howdy! If you're on Facebook, will you please go to the following page, and Share my long, long comment to Dale? Thanks, L. Neil Smith
Was that worth reading? Prodded by an article in Oleg Volk's blog, I sent off a note to my Senators. The influence of Neil's essay "Why did it have to be guns" is pretty obvious. I'm posting this in as many places as I can to try to spread the "zero tolerance" attitude on this issue. Paul
Paul Koning
Was that worth reading? My Open letter to Gun Owners of America:
T.J. Mason
Was that worth reading?
TLE AFFILIATE
|
|
|
|
Previous
Contents
Next
