Quote:Original post by capn_midnight
...
With your income tax rates, I would start to consider you enslaved. I put more importance into securing my own future than giving someone else a college education. A college education is only necessary today because we have made it so easy to obtain one, increasing the supply of college graduates and decreasing their value. As little as 20 years ago you could get by reasonably well on just a highschool education. My parents struggled a little when I was a kid, but nobody said life was easy. Now, I have friends making $150,000 a year and they are living paycheck to paycheck trying to make their payments on their house in North Virginia (high cost of living) and 2 SUVs and 1 sports car (none of which make better than 20mpg in fuel mileage on the highway). They couldn't control their spending, and now Hillary Clinton is talking about legislation to provide debt forgiveness to people who accepted crazy mortgage rates because they didn't read the fine print. I don't believe that a welfare state is a responsible use for tax dollars, and regardless of that fact, I don't believe an efficient, uncorrupt welfare state could ever be created in America.
While I'm not overly fond of our admittedly high income taxes (not to mention other lunatic taxes on the money your actually managed to save despite said income taxes) and I share your concerns about maintaining a wellfare state, exactly what good is having a gun going to do me here? Just about anything I could do with this gun is bound to get me either killed or put away for a very long time. Although this would indeed absolve me of having to pay taxes, I doubt this is the scenario you have in mind.
Quote:Original post by capn_midnight
Thank you for asking pointed questions. When you say this, the first thing I hear in my head is a little scenario, maybe acted out by the Monty Python gang. I'm not saying this to mock you, this is really how my brain works sometimes,
"Hi, I'm going to murder you and rape your wife unless you shoot me instead."
"No, I can't, asserting my own right to live would be selfish."
This is what I'm talking about. If you can't agree that self defense in this situation is right, then I guess we won't agree at all.
The moment I was writing this, I had a feeling someone would counter this with the all too familiar rape argument. True, the scenario you described is a horrible one and it does appeal to our -I think- primal urge to protect ourselves and our loved ones. Obviously I wouldn't consider acting out of selfdefense in such a hyperbole scenario to be selfish, but owning a gun however isn't going to guarantee that such a thing does not happen to you. To be frank, you're reposting the statement "you have to own a gun or you're vurnerable to all sorts of horrible things", which does look like good ol' fashioned fear mongering.
You were talking about a public uprising though, so my disagreement was aimed at using lethal force against people who you perceive to (indirectly) be a threat to your life or to ensure the vague liberties you think you are entitled to. I think this is dangerous since it would be a small step up from selfdefense, if indeed everyone has easy access to the means of lethal force.