Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottyS
It's not even close to alarmist. It's being a responsible US citizen. I admit that it's an abstract concept, but not in view of history. The more capable you are, the less likely it is that you will need to defend yourself. On both national and individual levels.
|
+1
I look at it from an even more abstract perspective.
Saying that US citizen are allowed to own guns is saying "citizens should be trusted to make their own decisions because they are willing to take responsibility for their actions". By arguing that gun ownership is inherently dangerous, you argue that people need to be saved from themselves. That people aren't responsible enough to be able to handle their own problems and that the govt's role is one of baby sitting the citizens.
Since I believe that the role of gov't is to serve the people, and not the other way around, I see the gun ownership debate as an indication that many people in this country have forgotten the whole point of the Constitution and the actual basis for our gov't. I don't think people should support gun ownership because guns are necessary for protection (either personal or from our gov't) but that people should support gun ownership because it's supporting the basic believe that the people's right to liberty is more important than the gov't right to rule us.
Like Scotty and Austin said, if the general population believes this as a basic tenant of our social system, we'll never have to worry about needing guns to overthrow an unjust gov't because the people in the gov't will respect the rights of individuals.