Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

Best EVER ProGun Argument! USMC Maj Caudill (Ret)

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by 1stklass, Jan 25, 2013.

  1. 1stklass

    1stklass salem oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    517
    Likes Received:
    335
    :thumbup:

    Interesting take and one you don't hear much. . . . . .
    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 armed 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 USMC (Ret.)

    So the greatest civilization is one where all citizens are equally armed and can only be persuaded, never forced.
     
    Will_Power, RadRaider, jfw and 23 others like this.
  2. civilian75

    civilian75 Hillsboro, OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,392
    Likes Received:
    627
  3. mosinguy1

    mosinguy1 out by the ocean Active Member

    Messages:
    425
    Likes Received:
    218
    A salute to the Major!!!!!!! Excellent, very proper and to the point!!!!!!!!!!
     
  4. bwchase

    bwchase Pacific City Active Member

    Messages:
    202
    Likes Received:
    54
    Yes, well said, much better than the way I have been presenting the same faces to anti gunners.
     
  5. Kevinkris

    Kevinkris Aloha Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,216
    Likes Received:
    444
    damn good letter i think i will post it everywhere i can.
     
  6. BAMCIS

    BAMCIS Eugene Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,191
    Likes Received:
    981
    Amen!
     
    1stklass and (deleted member) like this.
  7. Squidly

    Squidly Sandy Active Member

    Messages:
    375
    Likes Received:
    241
    Seen it before. Just as valid as ever.
     
    1stklass and (deleted member) like this.
  8. M67

    M67 NW Oregon Active Member

    Messages:
    422
    Likes Received:
    206
    Thank you 1stklass, for this post.

    I have posted this on social media sites, in the hope that some will see the truth.
     
    1stklass and (deleted member) like this.
  9. Kevinkris

    Kevinkris Aloha Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,216
    Likes Received:
    444
    up on facebook
     
    1stklass and (deleted member) like this.
  10. Stomper

    Stomper Oceania Rising White Is The New Brown Silver Supporter

    Messages:
    12,913
    Likes Received:
    19,581
    Thanks for that! I was inspired to write my state rep. (again) and I incorporated most of the OP into it. You can sue me for plagerism latter... LOL!



    Thought I'd paste a copy here for you all to read.



    Dear Rep. Komp,

    Greetings, I hope you and yours are doing well these days!

    I'm writing you in regard to the efforts of some within the Oregon legislature this session to infringe and restrict peaceful, law-abiding citizens' 2nd Amendment civil rights, as well as the rights enumerated the Oregon Constitution that are worded even stronger that the U.S. Constitution.

    Since you live in Woodburn (not very from me) and have no doubt had an eye full of the "gangster mentality" and know that the little worms do not observe the laws/restrictions already in place, or else we wouldn't have had the S.W.A.T. raids mere city blocks from our respective houses. If the several pieces of proposed legislation submitted by Sen. Burdick makes it through committee, and comes to the floor for a vote, I would appeal to you that you consider more than just the hyped-up hysteria fomented by anti-gun minded individuals and groups.

    Below is an interesting take and one you don't hear much. . . If you would, please 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 car load 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 armed 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 USMC (Ret.)



    Rep. Komp, the greatest civilization is one where all citizens are equally armed and can only be persuaded, never forced. I'm one of your neighbors, you talked with me on my front porch a while back when you were going door to door during the last election. I'm one of "those people" that own a multitude of firearms, more than a few are "evil assault weapons", and I have scores of "high capacity" magazines/clips for them, too. All of it; weapons, magazines/clips, and ammo are 100% locked up in a high-end gun vault (purchased @ Coastal Farm) with the access codes known only by me and my wife. That vault is also located in a monitored alarm equipped building.

    Rep. Komp, I am the neighbor you WANT to have those kinds of weapons. If things were to break down (earthquake, political upheaval, etc.) and the police weren't able to maintain public safety, I would be there (along with the neighbors I have formed loose alliances with) to defend my fellow citizens, their property, and keep our local "gangsters" at bay until things were set right again. Just so you know, I'm no vigilante and I don't fancy myself being some "avenger".

    Banning ten round magazines/clips will do nothing for public safety, people bent on murder will just carry more magazines/clips. Murder is already illegal, has that stopped anyone who chooses to commit it?

    Banning "assault weapons" will do nothing for public safety, people will just use other "types" of firearms & weapons... the majority of gun crimes are perpetrated by handguns, and less than 1% of gun violence (approx. 300 nationwide) is done with ALL "long guns" combined. That's hardly an "assault weapons" crisis.

    In an attempt to placate the currently legal owners of said items, "grandfathering" existing magazines/clips, and "assault weapons" will do nothing for public safety, as there are TENS (if not hundreds) OF MILLIONS of them already out there. Criminals don't care about the law. Grandfathering may seem like a good idea now, but that's NOT GOOD ENOUGH for FUTURE citizens' 2nd Amendment rights to have them stripped away little by little before they're even adults.

    I'm an 8-yr. Army veteran, and a patriot. I'm going on 46 and have never participated in any political demonstrations or movements, but I participated in the pro-2nd Amendment demonstration in Salem on Jan 19th. I found it to be a diverse crowd of an estimated 1,200-3,000 people from all walks of life and political proclivities. I'll be participating in the next one on Friday, Feb. 8th as well.

    You have struck me as a good and decent person. (edited out Woodburn Police Detective's name for his privacy) considers you a friend, and I highly respect his views and opinions. Please hear my words, please don't follow "party lines", please make a stand and choose liberty and freedom over the promise of a false sense of "security". You don't answer to anyone but your constituents, don't be bullied into towing the "party line". If you do the right thing and stand for our constitutional rights and vote against any further restrictions coming up, we'll have your back!

    If ever you have asked yourself, "what line being crossed by my government would cause me to make a stand against it?" This is mine.

    Sincerely,

    Stomper (My real name was in the letter... LOL)
    Woodburn, OR
     
    1stklass and (deleted member) like this.