I chose the gun
Sometimes, only the gun can stand between good and evil:
Like the bit about how violence has declined since the gun. Not so much the monopoly of force thing.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
December 1st, 2011 at 5:03 pm
Pretty well spoken.
December 1st, 2011 at 5:05 pm
We can sleep at peace at night thanks to the efforts of those willing to due violence on our behalf.
It was a fantastic presentation and stated exactly what so many of us have been saying. It is a tool and it’s up to the operator to decide how it’s used and the results it will create.
December 1st, 2011 at 5:15 pm
I didn’t read the academic paper he referenced, but the officer’s summary (the drop in murder rates over the past 500 years is because of the rise of governments) leaves out an awful lot of causes and variables.
It would be expected that the agent representing the monopoly on the use of force would advocate and aggrandize the continuance and expansion of said monopoly.
December 1st, 2011 at 5:39 pm
Nice video, wherever did you get it from? 😉
Notice the reactions in the crowd as he brings a (gasp) real rifle onto the stage. Some of the women have their faces in their hands. You can tell that they are completely afraid of that weapon and wholly ignorant of what it can and cannot do. The crowd reacts at the 2 minute mark as if he has brought in a canister of VX nerve gas and is standing there with his hand on the release valve.
December 1st, 2011 at 6:03 pm
I guess we should ask that representative of the monopoly of force where the 100,000,000 corpses in the past 1.0 centuries fit in with “reduces murder rate.”
My guess is he throws in a “no true Scotsman” fallacy that *those* bad monopolies weren’t *true* representative governments.
December 1st, 2011 at 6:22 pm
He kept talking about the “state monopoly of legitimized violence,” but he seemed to always be talking about offensive violence. He never spoke about defensive violence. I see them as different animals entirely. I can used whatever force is necessary to defend my life and the lives of other innocents. I can’t go next door and slap my neighbor. I wonder if he sees the difference.
I was a paratrooper in the 82nd Airborne. I know the name Nijmegan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Market_Garden
Glad to hear that he remembers what Allied soldiers did for him and his father.
December 1st, 2011 at 6:55 pm
Bug for the win.
December 1st, 2011 at 7:09 pm
Anyone that comes to you, demanding something you have, who has not convinced you that he, or who he represents, deserves it more than you, should face the end with the hole in it, only as long as it takes you to pull the trigger. I cannot personally conceive of someone deserving something I have more than I do. I may do him the indulgence of a burial, if it’s likely his decomposition would discomfit me. Elsewise, to the river with him. The biomass should be recycled.
December 1st, 2011 at 8:19 pm
5:35 “…It wass our last resort…”
And the dwadling of action, And appeasement of the madmen at the gates cost how many lives?
How many Americans and British because so many waited until it was too late?
December 1st, 2011 at 9:49 pm
The reason his father had an old gun was because he accepted that someone else had the duty to defend him or to supply his defense. The America has been as successful as it has been is mostly because we as people have chosen to accept the responsibility for our own defense & reserve the right to defend ourselves, the ultimate monopoly of violence is at the individual level & not the state. Relying on the state, by his own admission, is what lead him to choose the career he did. I wonder if he sees that himself.
December 2nd, 2011 at 1:55 am
That was very European.
The audience, of course, had likely never seen a real gun, and so his talk had real shock value – much more than if a similar talk had been given here.
The audience were all European movers and shakers, and so had never been exposed to the “violent but protective” idea.
But he is also one of the European movers and shakers, and so the idea of the state having a monopoly on the legitimate use of force likely came very naturally. It’s been a long, long time since the Dutch had their own rebellion. We are much closer to the days of ours.
December 2nd, 2011 at 2:01 am
PMain FTW x2.
December 2nd, 2011 at 8:53 am
I’m with him until he starts talking about a “State Monopoly” on violence and the capability for violence. No thanks.
December 2nd, 2011 at 9:38 am
Central governments have managed to turn murder from a hobby pursued at home by individual craftsmen into a wholesale industry churning out slipshod and substandard corpses in numbers that can’t be read without sounding like Carl Sagan.
December 2nd, 2011 at 12:17 pm
What if the reduction in citizen murder rate is due to the governments declaring large swaths of their populaces to be “non-citizens”, just prior to exterminating them?
December 2nd, 2011 at 12:49 pm
It was well spoken and he said a lot of good things.
Still I suspect the whole reason why “Many of you have never seen a gun” bit rang true was they were in an opera house filled with well-dressed folks.
I suspect folks living in the poorer sections of Rotterdam or Amsterdam have seen plenty of guns.
I personally have never seen Cocaine. That doesn’t mean that the prohibition on the Bolivian Marching powder is successful, just that I have been insulated from it, by luck, by the paths I’ve traveled in life, and by luck.
December 2nd, 2011 at 2:24 pm
BP is correct…
December 3rd, 2011 at 2:18 pm
He is willfully ignoring the rampant violence that occurs daily in the Netherlands and everywhere else.
Not soccer hooligans, or robbers, or rapists, or murderers, but something much more wide spread and aggressive than any of these.
The people who pay for his guns, his uniforms, his armed forces, are not allow to refuse.
If a man doesn’t pay for this “protection”, he will be arrested and imprisoned(and likely raped). His property will be stolen and his life destroyed.
This wont be done by terrorists, or foreigners, or some lone nut. It will be done by people claiming they are looking out for his best interests.
If he resist, he will be shot down with the very guns he was forced to pay for, wielded by the same men who claim to “protect” him from violence.
Extortion is violence.
December 4th, 2011 at 3:11 am
He wants to make a better world….. Ha!
“…. A Better World….”
“Sure as I know anything I know this, they will try again. Maybe on another world, maybe on this very ground swept clean. A year from now, ten, they’ll swing back to the belief that they can make people…better. And I do not hold to that……”
The Nazi’s his father wanted to shoot had the same idea…. they wanted to make a “better world”.
This statist sez the murder rate is 30 times less today than it was 500 years ago? Does he include the murders done by various gubmints in his figures? I guess it’s not “Murder” if the ones doing the killing are “legitimate” …….
Meh…..
December 5th, 2011 at 11:37 am
He was very eloquent. He’s also very much full of shit.
His entire statement can be boiled down to ‘It’s ok when my side does it because….”