Destruction - Yes. Mutually Assured? No!

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Fri, 31 Oct 2008 12:44:26 GMT  <== RKBA ==> 

Mike Vanderbeogh at Western Rifle Shooters - a rebuttal of this Jeff Knox essay Be sure to read this comment.

And how has that ballot box thing been working for us, eh? We must resign ourselves to being a despised minority in our country. If so, fine. As long as we are a despised FEARED minority, everybody will get along fine. How we accomplish that without somebody dying on both sides is a mystery to me. That's why I have reconciled myself to it happening. We are to the point where nothing will change without blood on the ground. I am willing to make the trade. Sorry about you, Knox.

...

The screws will tighten regardless. The only thing which will slow them down is a precise understanding on the part of the screwers what happens to them if they pick up the screwdriver. As Ben Franklin said, "Nothing concentrates the mind so wonderfully as the prospect of being hung in the morning." And you want us to leave the rope at the house because we might frighten the tyrants?

Add comment Edit post Add post

Comments (3):

Different Knox

Submitted by Ken Hagler on Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:10:02 GMT

The original essay was by Jeff Knox, not Neal. I thought the rebuttal was generally pretty weak, even juvenile. Not at all up to the level of other stuff I've read by Mike Vanderboegh.

The comment you point out makes a good point--and one which, I think, strengthens both sides of the arguement. Yes, the DC snipers were disruptive, but let's not forget a couple of other things about that incident:

1. They were revolutionaries. They were trying to start an armed uprising through their actions, and not only did they fail, most people don't even know that was their intention, because to virtually everyone in the country they were just a couple of bad people whose motives must never be examined.

2. The government reaction included vigorous persecution of people in the area who owned similar rifles, and highly intrusive Soviet-style roadblocks all over the area. There was no general uprising as a result.

Edit comment

Fixed

Submitted by on Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:30:47 GMT

Thanks Ken. Fixed the name.

Real revolutionaries would have to be very careful to avoid harming innocents. That's why rifles are the weapons of choice.

Edit comment

That would be nice

Submitted by Ken Hagler on Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:48:06 GMT

I agree they should be very careful to avoid harming innocents, but historically this has been extremely rare. The only revolution I know of in US history where no innocents were harmed by revolutionaries was the Battle of Athens, and that was a revolution with a very narrow scope and small scale.

Edit comment