Economist George Reisman, author of Capitalism: A Treatise on Economics, supports strict gun control. So do I.
Not gun control directed against the weapons of peaceful gun owners. Gun control directed against armory-facilitated violations of our rights by government and criminals.
In his essay “Gun Control: Controlling the Government’s Guns,” Reisman assures readers that he too believes in gun control. “However, I do so in the light of the knowledge that by far the largest number and the most powerful guns and other weapons are in the possession of the government.”
By its nature, everything the government does, good or bad, relies for its effectiveness on the threat of deadly force — otherwise people would be free to ignore its laws and rulings. Therefore, a meaningful program of gun control “must above all focus on strictly controlling and regulating the activities of the government.”
When government uses its powers against actual criminals — those who kill, rape, steal — this serves as a “control on the use of force, including the use of guns,” insofar as it deters such criminal acts of coercion.
The Constitution is a form of gun control directed against the government. To control the government’s use of force, such protections must be enforced and illegitimate uses of government power must be curtailed. Guns owned by a peaceful citizen are also a form of gun control — they can deter or counter wrongful acts of force by both private criminals and public officials.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
7 replies on “Out of Control”
Well, come to Winston-Salem and I will drop you in a “good” section. We will see if you are scared of the government–or someone else.
In fact, I will give you a choice of Greensboro, Winston-Salem or High Point. But I get to select where to drop you off for your nighttime adventure.
“The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” – Thomas Jefferson
The whole of the Constitution is an attempt to constrain the usurpation of power by the government. Jefferson said that liberty always loses to government.
JATR4 — You only make my point. We do have reason to fear criminals. Hence the need for citizens to be able to independently defend their life and liberty. Do you not foresee any need ever to defend against government tyranny? Would government policy possibly change if those in power knew we were physically defenseless?
Looking forward to your visit. Bring your gun(s). You may need them.
We can notify the government–the police–that you do not need any protection since you will be armed–and dangerous.
Just remember, you will be alone. But, I forgot, you are John Wayne.
Personally, I feel much safer when I see a police presence.
I really don’t think it is a good idea to go downtown at night if you know it is a dangerous area. Speaking of Holloween, what a straw man argument.
Gun owners protect their own property quickly and upon greatest need. Concealed carry and gun ownership also increases in areas where there is a serial killer or rapist, or where there have been random shootings. This is just as a positive development for public safety as is having a good police force. Both and.
Even though I do not own any firearms, I like to say that real gun control is learning how to control one’s guns.
And I agree entirely with the article.