no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics

Sooner v. Later

December 8th, 2007

Another renegade gunman, another day.

In the wake of the Omaha mall shootings, and reminiscent of other, similar tragedies in recent history, I’ve again found myself pondering some questions, thanks to Franc’s post yesterday, “The Omaha Mall Massacre: Thank You Government!“.

Terrible tragedies like Omaha, though rare, continue to occur with alarming-enough frequency, and the story always has the same ending: “By the time officers arrived six minutes later, the shooting was over.”

Gun-control opponents (myself among them) are often quick to tout the axiomatic, “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” But isn’t this nearly universally true, already?

The preponderance of evidence suggests that it’s already extremely unlikely that one of the “good guys” has a gun. It hasn’t happened yet to my knowledge, but sooner or later someone is going to thwart one of these fuck-tards with a well placed lead-sandwich. Sooner or later, the ass-hat with a rifle is going to walk into the wrong mall, the wrong bank, the wrong restaurant — the one where someone else is not afraid to stand his or her ground. I’d certainly rather it start happening sooner, than later.

If you’re in favor of keeping guns out of the hands of reasonable, law-abiding people, your vote is clearly cast for “later, rather than sooner,” and for that, you should be quite ashamed.

Every victim of gun violence represents failure of the State in its most hallowed charge: keeping safe its citizens. When the State can’t protect you (as has been demonstrated time after time after time,) to whom do you turn?

no third solution

Blogging about liberty, anarchy, economics and politics