The question of 'what will you do'......
Hello all, new member here, and glad to have found this place.
I have spent a little time reading and browsing, which any new person should do. I found this site through links from other posters on other sites, talking about things like Katrina.
One of the threads I rather enjoyed across the different sites I've been to, including this one, concerned the question of 'what would you do?', in the case of another Katrina-type roundup of weapons. Lots of informative and useful ideas, lot of responses, lots of outrage that such a thing can happen in the USA.
Unfortunately, there seemed to be a lot of 'well, it depends on the situation' type of answers as well. Those who seem to think that there are 'acceptable' circumstances under which you would surrender your sidearm in a crisis situation.
I am reminded of an old saying in my family, one that I was taught as a boy. 'Your right to swing your arm ends where my nose begins'. In my life, I have often posed a question to my daughter, my wife, my mom, and a host of other friends and relatives. The question asked is simple: 'Look outside the window, look around. Tell me what you see. Name ten things.' Invariably, the answers I get are mailboxes, other houses, street signs, someone walking a dog, a car passing by, and airplane flying overhead, etc....
I tell them, 'Now think about the answers you just gave me. How much of what you just rattled off to me is made-by-God, and how much is man-made bull****?' You can't hardly see the things of natural beauty, of the land and sky, for all the crap we put in the way. The signs, the billboards, the buildings, etc....
Now I'm not suggesting these things are in and of themselves bad. I'm simply making the point that what man builds, he eventually destroys. This logic applies equally well to the concept of institutions and law. God gave us ten rules to live by. Go to any law library and just have a look at what we've turned those ten laws into. Any topic, any situation, any set of circumstances you can think of, there's bound to be more than one rule, or exception, concerning it. You can't help but be confused when trying to correctly interpret this mass of written regulation, and doing it under duress in a time of emergency just adds to the mess.
Now toss in some natural disaster (the great wake-up calls) and a healthy dose of either crisis anarchy, or abuse under the color of authority. This is what I do (envision) when confronted with the question of 'what will I do?' when someone comes to my door asking me to render myself defenseless by turning over my sidearms. This is going to be a person(s) I have no knowledge of, never met, who is basically *ordering* me to place my life and those of my family under the trust of their authority. Well, that's a different kind of trust than say, asking me for a cup of sugar, and agreeing to wait at the door while I run and get it.
History has shown us (more than once) that in times of natural disaster, war, political upheaval (i.e., any kind of drastic CHANGE) all bets are off when it comes to whom you can trust, and in what authority you can place your trust, and the price of trust goes way up, it becomes harder to earn, and less likely to be given to those we don't know well.
This is the issue that concerns me when I'm posed the question of 'what will I do'. I don't concern myself with someones uniform, perceived or assumed authority, or even whether they themselves are armed equal to myself. I concern myself with the nature of their request/demand, and weigh it against whether or not I find it to be reasonable in nature. For example, is it reasonable to expect the police or the NG to go into the wealthier areas of NOLA, and go door to door, ordering people to give up their guns? Is it reasonable for authority figures to ask law abiding citizens trying to protect their own lives and properties to render themselves defenseless? I submit to you that the answer to these two questions is a resounding NO. And there are NO CIRCUMSTANCES I can think of that would make the above observation 'exceptionable'. More to the point, the police AND the NG/Army alike should know better than to carry out such orders, one has to assume they got training in things like constitutional law. They are our neighbors, peers, family members, kids. They are fellow Americans.
The ones who understand what I just said will never be the ones I have to face when they come to my door looking to seize my guns. As such, irregardless of the uniform they wear or the flag they fly, when they ask me if I have firearms, my answer is NO. If that isn't good enough, if they want to argue with me, if they insist on entering my home uninvited and without just cause, well, I can promise you, there's going to be a gunfight. They were given an answer and a chance to withdraw peacefully. If they choose not to take that opportunity to withdraw, and try to continue to abuse their authority against a law abiding citizen, well they took their lives in their own hands, I didn't force the issue. To be a person of principle sometimes means putting those principles to the test, irregardless of the outcome.
And the reason I feel this way? Because your right to swing your arm, ends where my nose begins. We either believe in our Constitution, (because our belief in it is what gives it TEETH) or we don't. When we don't, the cherished beliefs of the peoples we descend from aren't worth the paper they are written on, and are little more than a history lesson.
Replies are certainly welcome.