Courtesy of Oleg Volk
I was talking to a friend of mine last night, who happens to be a lawyer, and he made a comment about how much people's values have changed in this country in the last hundred years or so.
In particular, he was talking about the "us vs. them" mentality that people tend to get when it comes to the police. There was a time when everyone took responsibility not only for their own safety, but for the safety of their communities as well. Although, that was also a time when support for guns and religion was respected, not a punchline by a presidential candidate. Back then, people weren't expected to just to call 911 if they saw someone being mugged, they were expected to act to protect life and community. In 1864, if a person was being stabbed to death in the street, bystanders certainly wouldn't do nothing. But a hundred years later, people are told not to get involved, that they should just "be a good witness", call the police, and go back to bed.
As I said, this sense of duty to defense extended to communities as well. People were once proud to serve in a militia and be ready at a moment's notice to defend themselves, their neighbor, and their way of life. Now, the mainstream media sneers at the word militia, conjuring up images of drunken rednecks running around the woods in camo pants.
Then again, they're not exactly high on gun owners in general, particularly those who choose to carry a gun for self defense. Armed citizens tend to be the closest we have to the patriots of old because they do still have the moral strength and character to be prepared to protect themselves and others. So, what do you find behind the stereotype?
Jeff Snyder once said that we "carry arms because we value our lives and those of our loved ones, because we will not be dealt with by force or threat of force, and do not live at the pleasure and discretion of the lawless". The anti gunners will try to tell you that people who carry firearms for protection are mentally imbalanced individuals who see danger lurking in every shadow and are looking for any excuse to sling lead. But the truth is, we just want to be left alone to live our lives in peace. If a criminal tries to take our lives, we are prepared to meet force with force.
Another mischaracterization is that we want to feel big and get our way because we have "the power." The truth is, gun owners tend to be amongst the most tolerant of others. Gun owners don't try to meddle and tell people that they must believe and behave like they do. Sadly, it isn't often the same with anti-gunners.
Take for instance some users on
If you post in favor of Ron Paul, guns, or any other crackpot porn I *will* bury you. Tip of the day, nobody listens to you because YOU ARE FULL OF ****. **** off and die kthx.
But, we don't go in and try to prevent the anti-gunners from exercising their right to free speech. Then again, gun owners tend to love their freedoms, something not everyone can understand. All too often, people are more than happy to trade freedoms, particularly ones they're not "using", for a sense of security. Gun owners, on the other hand, realize that it is those freedoms that give us security.
The truth is, gun owners are all around. Most people will never know that the mother in line at the grocery store, computer tech helping with their email at work, or family dentist all choose to carry a firearm for personal protection. But if the chips are down, they can count on these responsible, law-abiding citizens to defend their lives against violent criminal attacks. Think of them as mobile crime free zones.
READERSHIP INTERACTION
Curt: Why does the majority in our government hate the Constitution so much?
I don't think a "majority" hates the Constitution, though some surely do as the protections and limitations spelled out get in the way of their ambitions. What I do think is that a lot of them feel major sections are irrelevant and antiquated, that the Constitution is a "living document" that ought to be interpreted liberally. These tend to be the same people who think that they know how to live your life better than you do, and if you won't listen to reason, then they'll just legislate their morality onto you. I once heard someone on NRA News comment that we're one election away from a State mandated bedtime, and that isn't much of an exaggeration.
Comments
Ron Paul Wins
You're correct, we have changed in the last 100 years. The news media have humanized the criminal eliment. They feel sorry for them because they had a difficult childhood or were not given a chance as a child and later, for a good job. Now we must change our thinking and start looking at these criminals for what they really are, vermin, not human, and a big threat to society and the way we live. We need to bring back public hangings and forget about any pain or suffering these animals might feel. Our young must see first-hand what happens to the lawless. It's time to get tough. It's time to tell the news media that these criminals are not to be considered human, but instead parasites on society who wouldn't hesitate to kill you or your loved ones. We need mandatory sentencing and "Three Strikes and Your Dead" laws. We need to take back our streets and neighborhoods. Our courts have left us no other means to protect ourselves other then carrying a firearm 24/7. Now the government wants to impose gun control laws that do nothing to stop crime, but instead deprive citizens to their right of self-defense. These elected officials are a threat to the lives of American citizens and should be removed from office by any means. The American way of live is at stake here. If we don't act, life as we used to know it will perish.
Otter, you can't have it both ways. Either the government will decide for you, and impose the things you talk about for their own purposes, or you take personal responsibility for your entire life, in voluntary cooperation with your community.
If you insist on government making these decisions and carrying them out, you can never be free.
"computer tech helping with their email at work"... omg, are you looking over my shoulder??? hahahaha...
It simply amazes me that to this day Gun owners get such a bad rap that they cannot get print. Its unpopular with media outlets and difficult to get the word out. However, if your a minority (which we could be) you can grab front lines every day. You could have a pro gun rally, pro protection rally, or even a pro defense rally the TV stations would be filming a mardi gras celebration. Good people need to speak up in daily conversations, emails and functions. This should not be like a secret society.
Daniel if I may make a clarification of something you quoted in your column.
The us v. them as regards police and citizen is not due to a change in the attitude of the American citizen. It is due to the change in the attitude of law enforcement personnel. We didn't change, they did.
They became publicly funded private security for the "connected", the politician, each other, and the wealthy. In that metamorphosis, they alse decided they were our masters. They determined that it was not necessary for them to know the law, nor to be bound by it. Because of their service to the existing power structure, they are protected from their misdeeds That immunity from consequences for bad and/or illegal behavior has made them arrogagnt and abusive of those they are supposed to serve. We see it every damn day.
There is definitely an us v. them attitude, but its genesis lies in the halls of congress, cities, counties, and state government.
How could a system so self-serving not attract the bullies, liars, criminals and morally decadent people who now wear the badge? All those precedingly described would naturally gravitate toward protection of themselves when committing transgressions against the body public. As it stands now, I do not believe any honest man can serve an entire career in law enforcement. The honest man will long since have quit, or been killed with the sanction of his brother officers well before retirement.
Do I sound bitter? Well, I am. I used to believe in them. Nothing attains the intensity of scorn reserved for betrayers.
The U.S. Constitution is not a living document, editable at will. It is not a document where politicians and groups may substitute their own judgment for parts of it with which they might disagree. It is also not right for D.C. and other cities to ignore the Constitution altogether with respect to 2nd amendment guarantee. Current politicians in power seem to think as the Constitution as more of a set of guiding suggestions that a document of laws. This undermines our system of justice and perceptions of its value. The results are leaders who are not worthy of the sweat of the brow of our forefathers, who forged this document. They knew and understood fairly well the nature of man and the possibility of tyranny of government over the governed. Few modern politicians have even a clue of the foresight of our founding fathers, or the will to share their vision.
"But if the chips are down, they can count on these responsible, law-abiding citizens to defend their lives against violent criminal attacks." Sorry, Dan, but I am not willing to risk my life, health, and everything I own to protect people who are too cowardly to protect themselves. I will protect myself, my friends, and my family from criminal assault. However, if I am in a mall or other public place and someone starts shooting or hacking people up with a machete, my first reaction will be to look for a way out. I will shoot back only if I (or my family) is in "immediate danger of death or grave bodily harm." Ask yourself this: you see a criminal killing people; you try to stop him by shooting him, and one of your rounds misses. That round hits a child. You stop the criminal attack, but the child is severely hurt or killed by your shot. Who do you think will be arrested and tried for negligent homicide? You will lose all of your savings and your home in a lawsuit filed by the child's family, and in defending yourself against a politically motivated prosecutor who wants to make an example of a "gun nut". It won't matter how many other children or adults you have saved by shooting the criminal - you will be hounded by the media, the "justice" system, and a pack of rabid lawyers. Is it worth that to save people who could have bought a gun, taken the training, gotten their own cocncealed weapons licenses, and protected themselves? Not to me. Given our society's attitudes towards gun owners, the people who are too cowardly or too lazy to protect themselves had better hope the police can help them in an emergency, because I am not going to risk my life, my health, and everything I own to protect them. Sorry.
Re quote: "People were once proud to serve in a militia and be ready at a moment's notice to defend themselves, their neighbor, and their way of life. Now, the mainstream media sneers at the word militia, conjuring up images of drunken rednecks running around the woods in camo pants."
As a member of the Virginia militia, I thank you for making this point. I'd also like to say that the militia is alive and well today. Its members are not warmongers, but you wouldn't know this from what the SPLC, ADL, certain federal agencies, and the mainstream media say about us. For anyone who wants to see for themselves what today's militia is like rather than taking someone else's word for it, please check us out at www.awrm.org or at my own website, www.virginiacitizenmilitia.org.
Peace,
Flick
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!