Quote of the day—The Responsive Communitarian Platform

There is, however, one measure sure to gain monumental benefits in the short run. It is politically nearly impossible to take, otherwise low-cost and very effective.

What is needed is domestic disarmament. This is the policy of practically all other Western democracies, from Canada to Britain to Germany, from France to Scandinavia. Domestic disarmament entails the removal of arms from private hands and, ultimately, from much of the police force.

The Responsive Communitarian Platform
November 18, 1991
THE CASE FOR DOMESTIC DISARMAMENT
[From the dark ages of gun ownership.

Low cost? The cost would be incalculable.

Effective? At what? The only thing I can see it being effective at is mobilizing people to “recall” (one way or another) all the politicians foolish enough to support it.—Joe]

7 thoughts on “Quote of the day—The Responsive Communitarian Platform

  1. “The only thing I can see it being effective at is mobilizing people to “recall” (one way or another) all the politicians foolish enough to support it.”

    It would also be highly effective at emboldening both the criminal element (inside and outside of government) and our enemies abroad, to say nothing of the general effects on society stemming from the blatant disregard for such a fundamental human right as self preservation.

    That quote from the RCP comes from the mindset of the mass murderer. What is a “communitarian” if not a communist, and what is a communist if not a mass murderer and an advocate of slavery?

  2. And, even if you believe in gun bans, it’s just objectively wrong. Countries like Germany have always _allowed_ firearm possession for the rich and connected.

    • In Germany licenses to carry are reserved for those in more jeopardy than the average citizen – Joe Public isn’t in any special danger, and a cynic might point out that we have too many unemployed anyway.

  3. It’s Thanksgiving weekend, so I’m thankful to see a point on which I can agree with the gun grabbers. Removal of arms from the hands of much of the police force sounds like a splendid idea.

  4. “and, ultimately, from much of the police force.”

    Yeah, when has that ever happened without a lot of unpleasantness this citizen disarmament is supposed to prevent?

  5. Stalin did not let the Kulaks have guns.

    His modern day fans are no different, and nor will the consequences if disarmament be any different.

    • I’m pretty sure that the consequences of (attempted) disarmament will be *quite* different. The Kulaks did not start off already owning several tens of millions of battle effective rifles when Stalin came along.

Comments are closed.