“We are in danger of forgetting that the Bill of Rights reflects experience with police excesses. It is not only under Nazi rule that police excesses are inimical to freedom. It is easy to make light of insistence on scrupulous regard for the safeguards of civil liberties when invoked on behalf of the unworthy. It is too easy. History bears testimony that by such disregard are the rights of liberty extinguished, heedlessly at first, then stealthily, and brazenly in the end.” – Justice Felix Frankfurter
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms
have prepared their own downfall by so doing.” – Adolph Hitler
One thing that continues to confuse me about our liberal friends is that they think it ridiculous and extreme that we would think that we might need weapons to ensure our safety from tyranny and corruption in government. We are looked at as extremists, kooks, and conspiracy theorists.
This is only a reaction of the ignorant, for if they bothered to take even a brief glance at this nations history, the mass slaughter of Indians, the enslavement of blacks, the indentured servitude of immigrant workers, the institutional violence against minorities, the blacklisting and imprisonment of people with political ideas not favored by the establishment, the struggle for women to gain the right to vote, the continued denial of rights to those of unfavored sexual orientations, the internment of innocent American citizens during times of war, police officers who abuse their power, corrupt politicians who use the system for personal gain, etc., etc., etc., the only logical deduction, when you look at all other nations throughout history as well, would be that corruption and abuse of power are a frequent component of human nature, and it would be only prudent and logical to assume that eventually those aspects of human nature would once again manifest themselves in a negative manner against the interests of society. Let us also be clear that these corrupt actions were, are, and will continue to be due to a failure to uphold and carryout the founding principles of this nation.
Additionally, those individuals in society who would fall prey to the inner desire of corrupt power have been a constant focus of critical analysis throughout virtually the entire timeline of political philosophy. Indeed, one of the great challenges of political science has been to formulate a framework of government that can balance the interests of freedom, with the interests of valid governance, while continually maintaining that balance. Human corruption has been a characteristic of every form of government created. Given this unfortunate, but unavoidable fact, we are now cast as the extremists for correctly identifying this basic component of human nature and wanting to ensure the people are adequately prepared to thwart it if necessary.
The one variable not being addressed by many is time, for even if you think president Obama is a just and wise man, he will be out of power in 2016. You like the Senate or the House? Most of them will be gone in 10-20 years as well. Who will take their place? Under what circumstances? What extreme forces or situations will facilitate victories in those elections? None of these things can be known, but what can be known is that the forces of human nature and corruption are always a problem.
Ultimately, what is more crazy, understanding that corruption, greed, ambition, and other undesirable aspects of human nature continue to have profoundly devastating effects on human life and liberty, or suggesting that somehow man has suddenly become perfect, that we have transcended the imperfections previously plaguing this world, and that we are now preparing to take our rightful place alongside angels? What is more crazy, identifying and understanding the seminal works of philosophy and the problems that human nature poses towards stable and just political regimes, or ignoring the great volumes of work that show time and time again mankind must struggle against tyranny?
If crazy to a liberal means educated, analytical, cognizant, rational, and logical, then by all means please do me the favor of continuing to call me crazy. If this is in fact how liberals define crazy, then let me be the first, and you can quote me on this, to emphatically proclaim that liberals are not crazy when it comes to the topic of the 2nd amendment!