2A or not 2A, that is the question

Status
Not open for further replies.
A morally fit armed society is a polite society. Parts of South Chicago are well armed and not polite. I am a natural rights guy and believe our ability to own firearms is inherent but it comes with an awesome responsibility. Societies without self control don’t have or eventually lose their liberty.
 
Blue Feather said:
A morally fit armed society is a polite society. Parts of South Chicago are well armed and not polite. I am a natural rights guy and believe our ability to own firearms is inherent but it comes with an awesome responsibility. Societies without self control don’t have or eventually lose their liberty.
Click to expand...
Ya, neutrality sounds great and all, but standing by while the Nazis conquered and slaughtered all around them isn't what I call morally fit. Practical and realistic, perhaps, but not moral.

Neither was slavery, sure, no society has been totally righteous throughout its history- the difference is we fought a bloody war to right that wrong. The Swiss still cling to their very convenient neutrality- I wonder if Putin will be as obliging as Hitler was when his armies are at their door?

As far as homicide rates, the Swiss are also some of the wealthiest people, per capita, and Hondurans among the poorest. Poverty breeds desperation, desperation breeds crime and murder.
 
Last edited:
Dan Forrester said:
Switzerland IQ - 101

Honduras IQ - 81

There is no better determining factor to predict criminality than IQ and that applies across countries as well as wintin them. I don’t buy into the armed society is a polite society thing a bit.

Source:

https://iq-research.info/en/average-iq-by-country

Dan
Click to expand...
101 still ain't great, just saying.

Humans are not born moral or altruistic- like all animals, our instincts are based on self preservation and procreation. People commit don't commit "crime" as defined by any given society (I.e. murder) for three reasons:

1) Lack of opportunity.
All free peoples enjoy the opportunity to commit crime, it is fundamental to their perception of free will. Only the strictest totalitarian societies can lay claim to sufficient control and surveillance that their proletariat is denied the opportunity to commit crime, and then only imperfectly. Still- a man in solitary confinement has little opportunity to commit murder!

2) Lack of desire/ fear of reprisal.
Two sides of the same coin. Does the pious man not strike down his neighbor for love of God or fear of Him? The results are the same, so the motivation is irrelevant. This requires a belief system of some sort, or secular institutional incentives and deterrents of sufficient force to keep mans' desires in check. This is the basis of most Human societies, and their success, failure, and longetivity depend on the quality of their religious and governmental foundations and how well the populace perceives their participation in said religion or government to meet their needs.
Which brings us to.........

3)Lack of need.
Why commit crime/murder when you're rolling in your Bentley to the country club for brunch? Sure, the affluent still break the laws (that's how most of them got rich in the first place), and, in extreme cases, the bored, psychotic, or psychopathic will still kill even when all their needs and wants are fulfilled, but these are statistical outliers. Humans are inherently lazy, and murder is a bit of work if you want to get away with it (see reason #2).

So, as to the OPs question, which societies can trust an armed populace not to go nuts and slaughter themselves and the guys in charge? That would be one founded in faith, with a government perceived to be just and competent to provide for the common welfare- and the opportunity for social and economic advancement.

There used to be one called the USA. I hear it still exists in spots......
 
I would argue that violent crime in places like Honduras etc is not generated out of need. Rather the thug element - organized crime - the drug, human and arms trafficking gang element, as opposed to those who just steal food etc out of being poor.

I think the poor factor is not the issue. There are and have been places in times past where people were literally starving to death - Biafra in the 70s comes to mind. They did not have significant violent crime.
 
Switzerland does not require anyone to own a gun and the citizens that have their service weapons at home are from their time in the Army...not a militia.

It is important for us to be factually accurate and not make things up like the antis do.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top