The Gun is Civilazation

[redlin67]

This is from an e-mail that someone sent to me. It may have appeared before, but just in case, here it is again. This guy has the right idea of why we carry.

"The Gun Is Civilization"

Interesting take and one you don't hear often.

As the Supreme Court hears arguments for and against the Chicago, IL Gun
Ban, I offer you another stellar example of a letter (written by a Marine)
that places the proper perspective on what a gun means to a civilized
society.

Read this eloquent and profound letter and pay close attention to the last
paragraph of the letter.

The Gun is Civilization
by Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force.
If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either
convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of
force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories,
without exception. Reason or force, that's it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through
persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and
the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as
paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use
reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or
employment of force.

The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal
footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with
a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a carload
of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical
strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force
equations. These are the people who think that we'd be more civilized if all
guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a
mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger's
potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative
fiat--it has no validity when most of a mugger's potential marks are armed.

People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the
young, the strong, and the many, and that's the exact opposite of a
civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful
living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that
otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in
several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the
physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser.
People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don't constitute lethal
force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with
a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works
solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both
are armed, the field is level.

The gun is the only weapon that's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian
as it is in the hands of a weight lifter. It simply wouldn't work as well as
a force equalizer if it wasn't both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don't do so because I am looking for a fight, but
because I'm looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot
be forced, only persuaded. I don't carry it because I'm afraid, but because
it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn't limit the actions of those who
would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would
do so by force. It removes force from the equation... and that's why
carrying a gun is a civilized act.

By Maj. L. Caudill USM C (Ret)

So the greatest civilization is one where all citizens are equally armed
and can only be persuaded, never forced.

[The Annoyed Man]

AGAIN!!! This is incorrectly attributed.

If there ever was Major Caudill, HE DID NOT WRITE THIS!!! I wish that the incorrect attribution would heal itself. You should hit the "Reply All" button with the following information:

This excellent essay was written by Marko Kloos, the owner of The Munchkin Wrangler Blog, who is a novelist and journalist. He wrote posted it to his blog on March 23, 2007 at 11:06 AM, New Hampshire time. In fact, he was actually paid for the rights to publish that article elsewhere. SEE HERE for confirmation of that. Here is ANOTHER CONFIRMATION from a different website.

It is worth noting that no Major Caudill has ever stepped forward to claim credit for this article. He is a fiction.

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE... If you ever get this email in your inbox, hit the "Reply All" button and send out a message to everyone on the chain correcting the false attribution and giving the REAL author the credit he so richly deserves. It is the RIGHT THING TO DO.

[bdickens]

Why in God's name did some idiot ever feel the necessity of appending the name of some ficticious Marine Corps officer to this article in the first place?

[redlin67]

Don't have a cow dude, this is the first time I saw it and I liked what it said. Thanks for the update, I can delete it if it bothers you that much.

[adv]

Notwithstanding incorrect attribution, this really is a quite eloquent and cogent argument for a firearm's place in a civilized society.

[The Annoyed Man]

Don't have a cow dude, this is the first time I saw it and I liked what it said. Thanks for the update, I can delete it if it bothers you that much.

No, no, please don't be offended. You had no way of knowing until I said something, so it really wasn't directed at you personally, and I apologize if you took it that way.

It's just that, as one who has written a number of essays of my own and published them on various Internet venues, I am acutely sensitive to plagiarism. Unfortunately, this particular email has gone viral and it is almost impossible to do something about it, unless everyone who receives it as you did is informed enough to do like I said above and hit the Reply All button to set others straight.

I've done similar things when I get these emails that have some anecdote which is recounted as a "true story," when all they really do is clog up the Internet with what are called "viral" messages. When I get one like that, I research it on Snopes.com. If it comes back as false, I hit the reply all button and send a brief sentence or two back to the list along with a link to the Snopes page. If enough people do that, maybe we can educate others into being more circumspect about forwarding what is essentially junk mail which just clogs up mail servers.

Also, I have had some personal contact via email and blog comments with the true author of this piece, Markos Kloos, and I just want him to get the credit he deserves. That is important to creative people - to be given the recognition for what they create if others find excellence in it. But again, I apologize if I offended.

Peace.

[boomerang]

http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=6290" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[bdickens]

Notwithstanding incorrect attribution, this really is a quite eloquent and cogent argument for a firearm's place in a civilized society.

Well, the credit for that eloquence and cognizance deserves to be laid at the correct pair of feet.

[sooeey2u]

Thanks for the correct author, will pass this along with credit due.