There is good and evil in the world. It gets so you yearn for a righteous fight. Personally I believe there are bad people, and God put people here to shoot those people, to let other people live peaceful lives. David was a shepherd boy who became king. The Philistines had their giant, Goliath. The Lord said to David, ‘I’m on your side. Go out and fight.’ David did. And you know, David killed Goliath as dead as Elvis Presley. He was a shepherd, a king, a follower of the Lord. But first and foremost he was a warrior. God understands that we have to have soldiers. Soldiers are part of God’s plan.
Russ Crane (pseudonym)
February 2010
The Distant Executioner (via Ry)
[“Crane” is talking about his work as a sniper with the police and military but most of what he says above can also be applied to anyone who carries a gun for defense of self and other innocent life. It’s a very sober read but I liked it.
I sometimes wonder how the anti-gun people view statements like that above. Do they see all gun use as wrong? Or is the use of a gun in the defense of innocent life acceptable? Or is it only acceptable when the person pulling trigger gets a government paycheck?
What about the fact that far, far more innocent people have been murdered by their government than by common criminals? Doesn’t that mean if firearms possession to be banned from anyone it would be more appropriate for the private citizen to be armed and government employees to be forbidden by law to possess weapons?–Joe]
Unfortunately, many statists have an inability to make the logical leap that the state only derives its powers from the rights of those who established it. A soldier can only shoot an enemy soldier morally if it is in defense of the individuals that formed the government that employs the soldier. I’m not saying that has to be an immediate and direct threat, either, I’m just saying it must be a rational response derived from the individual right to self defense.
Yeah Joe, arm the citizens and disarm the cops. I thought I was the one with unrealistic plans.
The other thing about you gun owners being put here to kill bad guys sounds pretty nutty to me. In some cases it might be clear who’s the bad guy and who’s the god-directed executioner, but most of the time it won’t be so clear. And I don’t think most of you guys are capable of making decisions like that. And the more you disseminate this nonsense the greater the problem gets. The good news is, well it’s good news and bad news, that the way things are going, the gun control benefits will become clear to everyone. The “blood in the streets” argument, which is not something gun control folks say, by the way, it’s something you accuse us of saying, will come to pass. Eventually the stats will bear out that more guns do not mean less crime.
I didn’t say the cops should be disarmed. I said that if anyone should be disarmed it should be the cops.
As far as being able to “make decisions like that” the police have an “error rate” of 11% while private citizens have an “error rate” of about 2%.
As far as the “blood in the streets” argument goes here in Washington state we have had both concealed (about 30 years) and open carry (since it became a state in 1889) legal for far more than enough time to get good statistics.
The data is in MikeB302000. Just because you don’t like the results doesn’t mean the data is going change after we collect another 30 or even 120 years worth.
Now that Sparky’s mistruths and outlandish anti-rights pipe dreams have been addressed, I have a little question for him: why have you not answered Joe’s question back here? It is, after all, quite shabby and petty to speciously claim someone’s logic is wrong, and then not back up your words with explanations…
mikeb30200-> You should go back to the library and check out and read, European history . . . as a start. Go all the way back to the beginning of recorded time and really read history. Then get back to Joe regarding armed and disarmed citizens and, blood in the streets and, murder.
I am truly amazed at the total ignorance of history that the anti gun crowd continually exposes the world to.
–
Since most on the left support abortion I don’t they will allow a gun to be used in the defense of innocent.
I just kills me how they feel that it is murder once a person is born, but not murder one second before they are born.
It is getting near time either we get rid of them or exile them. Your choice.
The good news is, well it’s good news and bad news, that the way things are going, the gun control benefits will become clear to everyone. The “blood in the streets” argument, which is not something gun control folks say, by the way, it’s something you accuse us of saying, will come to pass.
Oh wow! You claim not to use the “blood in the streets” argument and then in the very next breath say that there will be blood in the streets……
You truly are a gem MikeB.