Are there any unarmed libertarians on this site? If you do not own a firearm, what are your reasonings for it?
Firearms are one of those things that you don't realise how much you want/need only after it's taken from you.
Not sure if I'm really "educated" enough for my post to be considered on par quality here, but here's my view... Some of it may be copied/pasted from replies I've made in other discussions that I've been a part of.
As an American and a Christian, I believe that I have a responsibility to have arms, to be trained in their use, to be trained in at least basic warfare tactics, especially guerrilla tactics, and be prepared, able and willing to use those arms and tactics, be it against a foreign intruder or my own government, or my own neighbor, should the need arise.
My American responsibility, really, is founded on my Christian responsibility. Most of what I say will not make any heavy distinction between the two. I do realize, though, that not everyone here, and not necessarily everyone who believes similar to me politically, is a Christian.
First, I'd like to examine the Constitution of the United States of America. The second amendment says that I have the right to bear arms and that I have the right to a militia, which is necessary to the security of a free state. First, I'd like to point out that it says that these are necessary to the security of a free state. Because we do not have a significantly large, well trained or organized militia, we can conclude from this that we are either not secure, we are not free, or we are neither. I'd like to be both.
Now, what is the purpose of a militia. A militia's purpose is to protect the people from it's own government (or anyone else within the country that needs protection from) equally or more so than it is to protect the country from an outside invader.
I'd also like to point out the fact that it says "arms", not small arms, and I'd like to make mention of the fact that I do not believe any gun or arms control is necessary or right. I might go further on this later...
Necessary to the security of a free state... In the midst of a sort of "listing of our rights", we all of a sudden see this. What do I think of it? I believe it is a charge, a responsibility. It's saying, this is more than a right, it's a responsibility, it's necessary.
All of that you may consider American, as most of the documentation is from the Constitution, but I believe it's foundation is on Biblical principles. Even if you don't agree, Biblical principles at least do line up with this, there is no doubt about that.
If you wanted to, you could even apply stewardship to the situation. I'm supposed to be a good steward of my property and that means I'm supposed to protect it. Moreover, I'm supposed to protect my family, and others, from being harmed. Being disarmed and rendered at the mercy of the government is no different.
The real purpose of gun control? To increase the ratio of government power to people's power. That's it...
And that is the true purpose of gun control laws... It's not to benefit the people or make them safer, it's to reduce the power of the people. It's to reduce the peoples ability to keep the power of the government in check.
Self defense and defense of those that can't defend themselves. If you render yourself defenseless by surrendering your guns, your allowing yourself to become unprepared and unable to do what you're called to do.
I mean, do you think that God calls us to be good stewards so we can buy ourselves stuff we want? No, there are a lot of other reasons. The Church has major responsibilities, they can take a lot of money.. Good stewardship, be it with money or other things, can contain valuable lessons that can be applied elsewhere in our lives. The point is, though, good stewardship isn't merely something we're supposed to do for our own benefit. How does this apply to gun control? We're supposed to be good steward of what we have. Our land, our money, our country, our freedom, even our guns. That means protecting it. In my honest opinion, by choosing not to prepare one's self to protect it, he's choosing not to protect it. Basically, what I'm saying, is that this applies to gun control because good stewardship is a responsibility, not just a method of personal gain.
As far as the effectiveness of a militia, the Swiss used to be an excellent example. Some of Richard Maybury's books will go into more detail on that. I believe his book on WWII has a chapter or two that gives a lot of good information on it.
Now, I'm not saying I'm perfect, know all the answers, or am even a good example of this. I need a lot of practice with my guns before I'd consider myself really prepared, and there is a ton that I believe I should learn tactically. So I'm saying this to myself as well.
I've had more to say on gun control in general, but not all of it really applies to a responsibility to own and know how to use weapons, so I'll stop there for now.
To answer the orignal question, we do own weapons. Quite a few.
Hope it helps.
Righteous government, or the righteous lack thereof, is not the producer of a righteous society, it is the product of one.
You can't have my guns, but I'd be glad to give you my bullets...
I would like to be armed, but seeing as how I'm not yet 18 and I live in the university dorms, it's become a bit of an impossibility.
I do not share your point of view that Jesus was the ultimate pacifist. If you like to find out what it means to turn the other cheek, take it literal and try what happens :-) (Hint, the blow goes nowwhere)
I think that understanding the "new testament" without understanding it's foundation, the thora or old testament (which is a christian term i rarely use), is a fruitless endeavour, as understanding natural law without understanding Aristotele and Thomas Aquinas is.
Using arms always inherits the threat of being seduced to the use of arms, being seduced to the way of the powerful -those that build there power upon arms-. If one uses arms, it is easy to make them an idol, and that seems to me what the message is here. Each idol, be it gods, pop stars, politicians, the power my gun has, money(as a goal rather than a means to achieve goals) deminishes my selfrespect, that is the respect I have for myself without all those means. And because god created man(this is the judeo-christian-muslim dogma anyway) anything that draws away respect for this pure fact can lead to idolatry.
It is not the gun that is bad, it is the part of your selfrespect you give up and attach it to the power of the gun, that is bad. Think David. There was that huge guy Goliath, armed with the best weapons known at the time, and the little David, armed with a sling. Who won? The better armed or the one with more selfrespect? The one with the believe that he was the free creation in gods image?
Pacifism is voluntary slavery. Christians are no pacifists, neither Jesus was. Christians might be forced slaves, but never voluntary slaves.
P.S:
I know that it is dangerous to use the term "Christians" but I am happy to concede that this term has so much meanings that it can be attacked from almost any ankle.
In the begining there was nothing, and it exploded.
Terry Pratchett (on the big bang theory)
Most Christians are pro-mass murder. It does not surprise me that Jesus is not seen as a pacifist. Many Christians rely on the New Testament for Domestic Policy and the Old Testament for Foreign Policy.
I do believe Jesus was a pacifist, but of course many Christians think it's bad to have an abortion, but great to drop a bomb on an Afghan wedding party.
nhaag:Pacifism is voluntary slavery. Christians are no pacifists, neither Jesus was. Christians might be forced slaves, but never voluntary slaves.
Also, this is doublespeak. Resistance is an act of free will. If force subverts free will, then free will is something that can be taken from you. I do not subscribe to such ideas. I find them ridiculous.
The thing with religion that it depends on interpretation and is subject to change with time. Early Christians were pacifists but later Christianity was used to justifiy persecution of non-believers and other horrible things that the present day Church is probably not very proud of.
If I hear not allowed much oftener; said Sam, I'm going to get angry.
J.R.R.Tolkien, The Lord of the Rings