If you — my servant — are going to pass a law — and enforce that law using guns — and that law makes me and my fellow permit-holding constituents (who as I mentioned are more law abiding than the average person) so pissed off that we decide to shoot you dead over it — don’t you think that maybe, just maybe, you should rethink your position on that law?
That is the whole point of the Second Amendment, Duhrlene. When you are given the privilege of exercising the state’s privilege of force, you should do so with an armed populace at your back. It’s the American Way, and the more literal it is, the better.
The Everlasting Phelps
June 24, 2004
Shooting Up the Capital
[Regarding banning firearms from government meetings such as legislative sessions and city council meetings. See also the comment here. At numerous times I had thought about posting something along these lines but hadn’t put it in words. Phelps articulated my thoughts quite well.–Joe]
Sometimes the individual citizen needs to defend himself from the state. But that aside, barring weapons from government meetings would seem to be impairing both defense of self and defense of the state. Darlene Fairley needs to review her oath of office.