Saturday 30 March 2013

The Morally Superior Argument Debunked

As I have expressed my opinion about an armed citizenry on Facebook I have been experiencing a lot of fear from people. I explain that all rational thought leads us to giving the people the choice to arm themselves for self defense purposes.  I always thought this was a common sense idea.  I also thought that America liked its constitution and Bill of Rights.  I am learning a lot these days.  People think I am crazy or stupid or both. (I may be stupid-I dunno) Whatever, Let me lay out a few personal truths.

-I do not think the government is going to kill me or kidnap me

-I do not hope for the day when I get to shoot an intruder.  The anti gun crowd seems to think any man who prepares for self defense rubs his hands together in ghoulish delight at the thought of justified homicide.  Nothing could be further from the truth for me.   I fear and loathe that day and literally pray to my God to not have to put me through it.  I will never be the same and under the wrong conditions I may end up doing jail time or worse-who hopes for that?

-I want to be left alone by anyone who seeks to do me or mine any harm i.e. I am just like anyone reading this. With that said...

I do not claim the moral high ground. I have yet to "bust out" the preposterous notion that my position on anything is more morally just than anyone else's. I refuse to get into those theoreticals. I do however take great offense to anyone telling me that my desire to protect myself and loved ones from harm (using force if necessary) is somehow barbaric or less civilized.  Civilization has gone through many types of law.  We have seen and experienced 'Eye for an eye', stockading, and a myriad of other forms of punishment.  Self defense can be seen as a form of criminal punishment.  You have intruded on my or my loved one's right to exist peaceably.  The punishment is physical force, death as a possibility.  The only way to prevent this death sentence is of course to not intrude on another's right to exist peaceably.  This is a simple idea with zero room for gray area.  Either your life is in danger or it is not.  If it is not no death penalty can be enforced. 



There is nothing wrong with not wanting to die or see someone you love die at the hands of someone else. In fact it is a very human trait. Those who accuse me of lack of morality; I wonder if they themselves have this trait. If they do not have this trait who is the lesser human being? The man who wants to be left alone and protect his loved ones or the one who would simply let them be had at the hands of evil men? Those who would not even challenge those men who seek their harm?  Sometimes we enter into a quarrel or small fist fight and you must be the bigger man in order to contain the situation.  The bigger man argument does not work in this situation.  If a man breaks into my home and begins to stab my wife being the bigger man means allowing harm to someone I love.  At this point this man has left me little choice but to meet or raise his level of violence in the hopes to stop him.  Being the bigger man is a beautiful measure of strength and patience-we should all practice it.  However, when the other man cares not for your gentleman like gesture the idea can be dangerous, even fatal. In this scenario by taking the moral high ground it means sacrificing a woman I love to prove a point to a man I do not even know.

When I am told my morals are broken because I believe in an armed populace for strictly self defense purposes it troubles me.  Are you against self defense? What is the recourse of a disarmed public in the face of evil? If your answer is to call the police what you are saying is call someone who is indeed armed to handle the situation.  The end result is the same an armed man must come to the rescue but it cannot be me or anyone else for moral reasons.  The argument is a fallacy.  Provided the police get there and I am still alive they may do the same thing an armed civilian would do: use their weapons to subdue or end the situation.  At this point an innocent life has been changed or lost forever for "morality's sake."  You claim morality but stripping weapons from those who are good in turn creates more victims. You claim morality yet expect me to do nothing when an evil man enters my home? (these are the same folks who cry someone should do something when they hear about a third time offender raping or killing someone else)  Everyone wants crime gone from our streets.  The only people who don't are of course criminals.  Owning a weapon does not make me a criminal...my actions do.  I am judged by those who are "morally superior" before I even commit a crime.  Not all crimes are committed with weapons do these people assume non weapons owners will commit crimes?  Of course not-that would make they themselves criminals and how can they be-they own no weapons since they are morally superior.






Your moral stance is a falsehood. It is a justification for your fears. Fear of weapons, fear of the world, fear of something-you fear me because I own a weapon. Do these people so full of fear cross the street and dine out with their friends? They do? well they have engaged in things that can get them killed without fear mind you and without having met me brand me as dangerous.  This is what is fair to them.  Our world is a mess.  Maybe these folks have never had a gang banger or neo nazi come into their life and destroy their happy little world?  If not thank God-I envy them.  To live in a happy little world no one can touch is the goal of most citizens.    They assume the world would be perfect if not for these pesky guns.  If history has taught us anything it's that we are well adept at killing one another with or without arms.  You would think these morally superior people would be in favor of arms.  If a six foot five thug is going to use his muscles to force a rape or robbery and a pistol is pulled out of the supposed victim's pocket the tables have turned dramatically.  There is crime being prevented and no one has to die.  A one hundred pound woman can now take out a gang of five with the right handgun and training.  Arms favor the weaker person in an engagement.  Taking those arms away puts the larger predator in an advantage.  We all know these guys prey on what they feel are easy targets to begin with why remove their ability to put the odds in their favor?

                                                           

You fear me because I own a weapon-why?  If I am your neighbor and I see a gang of men entering your home do you think I will simply let them? It seems like you fear the wrong people. Fear will only lead you to justification and blind acceptance as your fear being a truth. The reality is you need only fear evil intent and that is not brought upon by ownership of weapons or playing video games or bunking school.  It comes from those who do not cherish life. Like those people who would prevent me from protecting my loved ones. How can you claim to cherish life and disarm those who seek to protect it?

No comments:

Post a Comment