Freedom and Guns

[henry quirk]

How EXACTLY did having a shotgun save "your life" or "your butt"?

Some years back, my home was broken into. I was there. Havin' that shotgun, I was able to persuade the interlopers to leave as they came, and to leave me as they found me. Without it: things might have turned out differently. Mebbe those fellas woulda just robbed me and left me be...mebbe. I'm glad I didn't have to find out.

[Age]

But OWNING A GUN is a SIGN of OPPOSING FREEDOM.

Guns are created to KILL, which is a CLEAR SIGN of CONTROL OVER "others" and NOT FREEDOM, AT ALL.

Without his Peacemaker, a runt like Buster Scruggs, exercising his God-given right to freedom of speech and dealing with the aggressive consequences heaped upon him as attempted punishment by the egocentric and aggressively-conditioned, would not have lasted as long as he did in the Wild West.

ANY human being lasts for the EXACT SAME length of time, with or without a gun, when a nuclear bomb is dropped on one's head.

Owning a gun, or a nuclear bomb, is to 'try' and have CONTROL OVER "others". Which is, literally, NOT FREEDOM AT ALL.

[Age]

How EXACTLY did having a shotgun save "your life" or "your butt"?

Some years back, my home was broken into. I was there. Havin' that shotgun, I was able to persuade the interlopers to leave as they came, and to leave me as they found me. Without it: things might have turned out differently.

The main word here is 'MIGHT'.

Mebbe those fellas woulda just robbed me and left me be...mebbe. I'm glad I didn't have to find out.

So, AGAIN, how, EXACTLY, did having a shotgun save "your life" or "your butt"?

Maybe they MIGHT have just wanted a toothpick?

Did you ever actually get around to just ask them what they wanted, or were you just TOO SCARED at that time?

[henry quirk]

Clarifying question for you, Age: you find someone, a stranger, someone you did not invite, in your home, at 3am. What do you do?

[iambiguous]

By definition it creates tension. Without tension there is no life.

LOL
LOL
LOL

ANOTHER PRIME EXAMPLE of one who will say just about ANY thing, in order to 'try to' "justify" their currently held BELIEFS.

Just for the record, I did not write that.

[promethean75]

"you find someone, a stranger, someone you did not invite, in your home, at 3am. What do you do?"

Get the burglar a beer and propose a partnership; this person could be much more successful working with me.

[Nick_A]

Age

AGAIN, the ABSURDITY of obtaining the "bigger" gun, or of stockpiling the "most" (dangerous) weapons, to "protect" one's self from one's self, speaks for itself. The Fact that some human beings think or believe that 'we', human beings, are obtaining MORE and/or BIGGER weapons to "defend" "ourselves" from human beings with weapons, and thus, literally, from "ourselves", speaks VOLUMES of just how STUPID some human beings REALLY WERE, back in the days when this was being written.

And, LOL thinking that HAVING and USING guns and weapons would SCARE "themselves" into FREEDOM, goes BEYOND ABSURDITY and STUPIDITY.

BEING AFRAID is NOT FREEDOM, and ONLY the SCARED own guns, for "defense".

For some reason you deny the most basic of human motivations classically expressed as Might makes Right. A person has the obligation to defend against those expressing defense with guns opposing those attacking with guns. From Wiki

Might makes right or Might is right is an aphorism on the origin of morality, with both descriptive and prescriptive senses.

Descriptively, it asserts that a society's view of right and wrong is determined by those in power, with a meaning similar to "History is written by the victors". That is, although all people have their personal ideas of the good, only those strong enough to overcome obstacles and enemies can put their ideas into effect, and spread their own standards to society at large. Montague defined kratocracy or kraterocracy (from the Greek κρατερός krateros, meaning "strong") as a government based on coercive power, by those strong enough to seize control through physical violence or demagogic manipulation.[1]................

You want to deny human nature through wonderful thoughts. It is pure fantasy. The reality of the human condition is expressed as might makes right. The struggle for supremacy is basic animal nature. The wise man knows the value of guns in favor of self defense and the defense of freedom.

[Age]

Clarifying question for you, Age: you find someone, a stranger, someone you did not invite, in your home, at 3am. What do you do?

I ask, "Who are you?", "What are you doing?", "What are you looking for?", "What is it that you want?", or some 'thing' else. I am CERTAINLY NOT going to so-call "defend" ANY physical property, and what I would ACTUALLY DO all depends on the EXACT situation. For example, was I asleep?, was I half way through a shower?, was I watching television, was I reading or replying on a philosophy forum', was I half way through sex?, was I watching porn?, was I having a late 'midnight snack'?, was it just family member just coming back home, which I was not expecting, but they just appeared as a stranger, AT FIRST?

But I CERTAINLY do NOT pick up a shotgun and shoot them DEAD, just because they MIGHT be coming to take my toothpick, and THEN find out thee Truth.

In fact if someone came into my home at 3am, and I did NOT YET know them, and they had not been invited, then I would wonder if they are okay, and go about FINDING OUT, FIRST.

Have you EVER considered that NOT EVERY one lives in a place, like you do, where FEAR can have a long lasting effect, AND CONTROL, over the people?

Also, because there are NOT closed doors on my home, let alone LOCKED DOORS, human beings, to me, are NOT SEEN as "strangers", and are WELCOMED.

But, 'you' may LOOK AT and SEE 'things' DIFFERENTLY, as EVERY one is DIFFERENT, correct?

[Age]

By definition it creates tension. Without tension there is no life.

LOL
LOL
LOL

ANOTHER PRIME EXAMPLE of one who will say just about ANY thing, in order to 'try to' "justify" their currently held BELIEFS.

Just for the record, I did not write that.

VERY SORRY, and APOLOGIES.

I have fixed it up now, already.

[Age]

"you find someone, a stranger, someone you did not invite, in your home, at 3am. What do you do?"

Get the burglar a beer and propose a partnership; this person could be much more successful working with me.

"the burglar".

NO wonder so many human beings are SHOT DEAD, especially in some countries, when ASSUMPTIONS are continuously being MADE, before ANY CLARIFICATION is GAINED, FIRST.

[Age]

Age

AGAIN, the ABSURDITY of obtaining the "bigger" gun, or of stockpiling the "most" (dangerous) weapons, to "protect" one's self from one's self, speaks for itself. The Fact that some human beings think or believe that 'we', human beings, are obtaining MORE and/or BIGGER weapons to "defend" "ourselves" from human beings with weapons, and thus, literally, from "ourselves", speaks VOLUMES of just how STUPID some human beings REALLY WERE, back in the days when this was being written.

And, LOL thinking that HAVING and USING guns and weapons would SCARE "themselves" into FREEDOM, goes BEYOND ABSURDITY and STUPIDITY.

BEING AFRAID is NOT FREEDOM, and ONLY the SCARED own guns, for "defense".

For some reason you deny the most basic of human motivations classically expressed as Might makes Right.

NOT EVERY one lives in countries where ABSURDITY abounds.

I do NOT KNOW of ANY one, personally, with the so-called 'motivation' "Might makes Right". Besides the IRREFUTABLE Fact that "Might makes Right" is an ABSURDLY False, Wrong, AND Incorrect expression, thinking or BELIEVING that 'that' is a "most basic of human motivation" just SHOWS and REVEALS just how TWISTED and DISTORTED the thinking and/or BELIEVING of adult human beings REALLY WAS, back in those OLDEN DAYS when this was being written.

A person has the obligation to defend against those expressing defense with guns opposing those attacking with guns.

And WHERE is this so-called "obligation" coming from, EXACTLY?

Also, can you REALLY NOT SEE that if there were absolutely NO, human invented and created, guns, then absolutely NO one could "attack with guns" to BEGIN WITH?

And, if there were NO guns, FULL STOP, then 'you', human beings, would NOT 'HAVE TO' "defend" "yourselves", from "yourselves".

From Wiki

Might makes right or Might is right is an aphorism on the origin of morality, with both descriptive and prescriptive senses.

Descriptively, it asserts that a society's view of right and wrong is determined by those in power, with a meaning similar to "History is written by the victors". That is, although all people have their personal ideas of the good, only those strong enough to overcome obstacles and enemies can put their ideas into effect, and spread their own standards to society at large. Montague defined kratocracy or kraterocracy (from the Greek κρατερός krateros, meaning "strong") as a government based on coercive power, by those strong enough to seize control through physical violence or demagogic manipulation.[1]................

Overcoming so-called "society's views" is overcoming obstacles and enemies. Like, for example, explaining to a 'society', (the enemy, and their beliefs the obstacle), that actually the earth really does go around the sun, and not the other way around, is putting one's ideas into effect. Just like explaining to societies that actually we can ALL really live in peace and harmony, and not the other way around, is putting my ideas into effect, and spreading my own 'standards' to society at large.

The 'Might' here is just 'seizing governmental coercive power, through logically reasoning', and, literally, just putting 'that idea' into effect. My 'standards' will then come to LIGHT, for ALL to SEE.

The 'Might is Right' here is NOT "power, through physical violence" but 'Truth, through logical reasoning'.
'
Just like 'survival of the fittest' is NOT "the strongest survive" but 'the one who is best adjusted, or who is able to adapt the best, is the most successful in surviving and reproducing'. In other words 'that' what FITS IN PERFECTLY, with the "others", is, literally, the FITTEST.

This ALL becomes MUCH CLEARER, 'along the way', as they say.

You want to deny human nature through wonderful thoughts. It is pure fantasy.

What are you on about now?

I have ALREADY ACKNOWLEDGED and ADMITTED that 'you' ARE; capable of both the most horrible atrocities as well as the most profound compassion.

So, what is 'it', EXACTLY, which you think or BELIEVE I am 'denying here?

The reality of the human condition is expressed as might makes right.

But what IS "the reality of the human condition"?

The expressed words, "might makes right", can be and DO get MISCONSTRUED just like the expression, "survival of the fittest", get MISCONSTRUED.

In fact ANY and EVERY 'word' can get MISINTERPRETED, and VERY EASILY and VERY SIMPLY, by the way. As PROVED True ALREADY throughout human history, and just THIS FORUM.

The struggle for supremacy is basic animal nature.

LOL
LOL
LOL

So, EVERY new born human baby IS "struggling for supremacy", correct?

And, also and by the way, 'supremacy' of, or for, 'what', EXACTLY?

The wise man knows the value of guns in favor of self defense and the defense of freedom.

LOL
LOL
LOL

As just PROVED IRREFUTABLY True, ONCE AGAIN, here, these people, in those OLD DAYS would say just about absolutely ANY 'thing' in the hope that those words will, SOMEHOW, back up and support their currently HELD BELIEFS.

[Dontaskme]

The wise man knows the value of guns in favor of self defense and the defense of freedom.

Saying ''freedom'' is something that needs to be defended just makes the word itself meaningless.

This is the problem with human conceptual understanding. The word ''freedom'' is basically empty and not real, except as a belief. How can one be free if one is ever having to defend that believed state of being?

..does owning a gun mean the gun will save you from being killed? and that rather than be killed you will defend what you believe is freedom from being killed? So what about all those people who do not own guns, are all those people not free?

The word ''freedom'' is the most ridiculous word ever imagined. Imagine this, human beings make up the ridiculous story that is known as being ''free as a bird'' and yet 'birds' do not carry guns to defend themselves. Birds do not have a self to defend.

There is no self to defend, do you see where I am going with this...if there is a self to defend, then that self will always be on the defensive with itself, namely from others whom may threaten the life of their believed self. That is bondage, not freedom.

In reality, no thing is free because no thing is bound...the human conceptual story is the dream of separation where there is none. And humans fall for this story hook, line and sinker, and is why they continue to live in tension for their entire life until death. They've invented the word ''freedom'' to assuage the tension that is innately natural to all sentient living organisms.

What's completely overlooked here, is that the idea of a self that needs to be defended, means there is a fear that needs to be defended, not a freedom.

Freedom is the most misunderstood word...

Freedom simply means whatever happens happens because there is NO opposition in the instance of happening to undo the instant of happening.

If there is a freedom of losing freedom, then a freedom that can be lost is not a freedom at all.
It's the same with the sense of 'self' if the 'self' can be lost, then there was never a 'self' there.

.

[RCSaunders]

If there is a freedom of losing freedom, then a freedom that can be lost is not a freedom at all.

There's something wrong with that. It's like say, "a life that can be lost is not life at all." Most slaves were not born into slavery. Before some thugs captured them and put them into slavery they were free, weren't they?

Anything of value one has can be lost, and in most cases preserving what is of value requires constant effort or it will be lost. Nothing lasts forever, especially if not cared for. Freedom is the same.

[Dontaskme]

If there is a freedom of losing freedom, then a freedom that can be lost is not a freedom at all.

There's something wrong with that. It's like say, "a life that can be lost is not life at all." Most slaves were not born into slavery. Before some thugs captured them and put them into slavery they were free, weren't they?

Anything of value one has can be lost, and in most cases preserving what is of value requires constant effort or it will be lost. Nothing lasts forever, especially if not cared for. Freedom is the same.

There is nothing wrong or right in the world except as belief, within the dream of separation. Value is a condition placed upon the idea there is a self to value, in reality, there is no self at all. The belief that there is a self, will always live on the defensive, and that is not freedom.

[RCSaunders]

Teen, 18, is charged with first-degree murder for shooting dead father-of-two who walked over to his car and hit him in face through his window during road rage attack

This is the kind of thing that makes some people oppose the ownership of guns. But the deat could have been caused just as well with a knife, hammer, other weapon or tool. It was not the gun that caused the death, it was the stupid teen who used it.

But there would not have been any death if there had not been an idiot belligerent father who thought the way to solve a disagreement was to use force and, "teach him a lesson."

Hope everyone learned their lesson.