Yes, it’s not really about the Second Amendment
Joel is right, of course. And as Kevin Wilmeth notes, the way he says it is sheer poetry. Self defense isn’t ever about the Second Amendment. It’s about being a mature, self-responsible creature.
On the other hand, when you’re a mature, self-responsible, sapient creature living in a land of laws (even if it’s no longer a land that has much use for the rule of law), the Second Amendment is one potential self-defense tool. Especially if you’ve already been captured by the state.
I know. All this goes back to the endless old anarchist/minarchist debate among libertarians and OMG, let’s not get into that again! I come down firmly on the anarchist side. I used to avoid the A-word because most people have been so conditioned to misunderstand it (and to misunderstand it in the most negative, inflammatory possible way!). But the more I see of the state, the more obvious it is to me that there’s not a government on earth that can claim any legitimacy — and not a constitution on earth that can restrain a government. Now I find myself telling even casual acquaintances that I’m a free-market anarchist, and if that alarms them, so be it. But increasingly … people actually understand.
Still, the Bill of Rights is a wonderful statement of what ought to be. If the best defense, for humans, involves tools and cunning rather than claws or teeth, why not use it in circumstances where it might be the best tool for the job?
Just don’t make the foolish mistake of believing that the BoR “gives” us anything that we didn’t already have. But nobody around here would do that, right?
October 19th, 2010 at 10:21 am
It is too easy to fall into the word trap of saying “Constitutional Rights”. No the Constitution does not give us rights, we have rights because we are human.
I try to say “Constitutionally Protected Rights”. The Constitution protects the rights we have.
October 19th, 2010 at 8:22 pm
Well, the Bill of Rights points out a tiny subset of the billions of rights that exist simply because we are living human beings. It obviously “protects” nothing. But I get what DrillSgtK is trying to express.
And that’s if rights exist at all. But if they don’t, then no one has a “right” to rule anyone who is not harming them, so the problem once again goes away.
And, no, I’m not drinking bloody marys (or anything else fun).
October 19th, 2010 at 9:02 pm
There’s a new development. Apparently the Government is now asking the Telecoms to stop “upgrading” their systems. It seems they’re having trouble with wiretapping us.
http://gizmodo.com/5667592/feds-to-telecoms-stop-upgrading-so-we-can-wiretap-more-easily
And here I thought they were easy peasy with tech, like James Bond and everything, the movies says so. Apparently not.