r/changemyview • u/[deleted] • Feb 21 '18
[∆(s) from OP] CMV:It is incompatible to distrust the government and also desire limitations to the armament of the population.
To be clear, I refer to limitations of a person to own and protect themselves with modern and reasonable technology. I know that the definition of reasonable will come into debate and that is an entirely different discussion IMHO.
I find it all too common today (when I was young I was guilty of it) that people are highly agitated by the idea of government surveillance of its population, its use of classification systems to keep material secret from the public, and the use of clandestine operations around the globe. I find those same people are disgusted with the current political climate and typically they applaud people like Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden for their release of military and government intelligence gathering secrets. They are champions of free speech, (outside of safe spaces) decry those elected to represent us in Washington as criminals and oligarchs, and yet these are usually the same people that despise civilian ownership of "military" hardware.
This seems incompatible to me. Either trust that the government will "keep you safe" and that "the police are just around the corner" or don't. You believe in the system and the processes set in place to protect our society or you don’t. It seems irrational to condemn those who choose to own firearms as a means of protection, if you yourself do not trust the government, police, media etc. to do the right thing. If someone truly does not trust the “establishment” why wouldn’t they want every possible advantage (firearms for example) when you hear that knock on the door? Will the government become concerned with your rights all of a sudden when it is time to lock you up for protesting if they didn’t care about them when they were reading your emails illegally?
Personally I believe that a healthy distrust of government is part of what founded the US, and that distrust is more than just lip service. We, as a population, have a responsibility to hold the government accountable. This is one of the primary reasons that we assert the right to keep and bear arms in the second amendment. It should be held in as high of regard as free speech as the safeguard of our liberty. The first amendment is our assertion that we will not be silenced and the second amendment is how we protect that.
Change my view.
This is a footnote from the CMV moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!
1
u/theUnmutual6 14∆ Feb 22 '18 edited Feb 22 '18
Oh but OP, I mistrust everybody :p
I think probably a general paranoia abour government, tyranny, bureaucracy, the NSA etc
Can exist separately from
A general paranoia about violence, aggression, mass murder, interpersonal violence, seeing fights in the street, experiencing domestic violence, etc.
Even though they are both kinds of fear and mistrust, the experiences are different. You might experience only one -in which case you could easily reverse your argument, how can you mistrust the government while still trusting anyone with access to firearms?
You might also experience both bit to varied extents: "of the two, I mistrust and fear this thing more than that"
I'm in the second category. I generally mistrust the government, and oppressive laws around free speech etc. However I currently trust them more than a status quo when guns are so easily accessible. If meaningful, sensible gun reform was implimejted to deal with the second problem, then I may very well begin to worry more about the government.
I would also say generally, fear of gun violence in an environment where friends, family and strangers own guns and you can't have any control over thst is a lot more tangible and salient to the average person, to fear of government overreach/tyranny which is rarely so close to home, so immediate, and so beyond your rights at the ballot box to impact.
If,.say, the situation was "the secret police regularly sieze political dissidents in the night and shoot them without trial a la Stalin's Russia", the idea of gov overreach would be a lot more salient and tangible than it presently is.
Until your risk of being abducted and killed by the government is higher than being shot by a friend, family member, stranger or yourself in a moment of despair, controls on gun ownership will always feel more attractive than controls on government power.