I remember having a conversation with a 'gun nut' friend who insisted that she should be able to carry and shoot her gun anywhere she likes. I disagreed. I found it astounding that she couldn't see that 1) her gun created a power inequality between her and anyone without a gun and 2) that unless she could guarantee that her bullets had a certain trajectory and stopping point, she was impinging on the freedom of others to move about without concern over being hit by stray bullets. She, on the other hand, was bothered that I thought there should be regulations in place to protect people who she had no intention of threatening - her problem with my arguments could all be boiled down to "Who is given the power to enforce these regulations?" and further that anyone given that sort of power is almost certain to use it for their own advantage. Why should she have to give up power to someone else in the interest of unknown others? Why should she have to give up her own best interest to the interest of others with uncertain motivations? We were at loggerheads - I tried to argue that it wasn't her, a person with presumably benign motivations, that the regulations were protecting society from, but from people with darker reasons for having or shooting a gun. Her counter-argument was that criminal person wouldn't be swayed by regulations so all the regulations were actually doing was dis-empowering her while empowering an enforcer class that would create more regulations thus depriving her of more power and beefing up the power of the enforcer class which would eventually come to be controlled by those without an altruistic intention. I tried to argue checks and balances, protection of the weakest members of society, representative government, and more - and left the table pretty sure that I was right and she was wrong - and a part of me still wants to believe that - but in my heart, I know she was right. I don't like it because I want to believe in the hallowed institutions of self-governance and U.S. style democracy - but damn it - she was right. Or at the very least, we were both missing some 'right' middle ground.
The Regulated Society
The Regulated Society
The Regulated Society
I remember having a conversation with a 'gun nut' friend who insisted that she should be able to carry and shoot her gun anywhere she likes. I disagreed. I found it astounding that she couldn't see that 1) her gun created a power inequality between her and anyone without a gun and 2) that unless she could guarantee that her bullets had a certain trajectory and stopping point, she was impinging on the freedom of others to move about without concern over being hit by stray bullets. She, on the other hand, was bothered that I thought there should be regulations in place to protect people who she had no intention of threatening - her problem with my arguments could all be boiled down to "Who is given the power to enforce these regulations?" and further that anyone given that sort of power is almost certain to use it for their own advantage. Why should she have to give up power to someone else in the interest of unknown others? Why should she have to give up her own best interest to the interest of others with uncertain motivations? We were at loggerheads - I tried to argue that it wasn't her, a person with presumably benign motivations, that the regulations were protecting society from, but from people with darker reasons for having or shooting a gun. Her counter-argument was that criminal person wouldn't be swayed by regulations so all the regulations were actually doing was dis-empowering her while empowering an enforcer class that would create more regulations thus depriving her of more power and beefing up the power of the enforcer class which would eventually come to be controlled by those without an altruistic intention. I tried to argue checks and balances, protection of the weakest members of society, representative government, and more - and left the table pretty sure that I was right and she was wrong - and a part of me still wants to believe that - but in my heart, I know she was right. I don't like it because I want to believe in the hallowed institutions of self-governance and U.S. style democracy - but damn it - she was right. Or at the very least, we were both missing some 'right' middle ground.