Ayn Rand on Gun Control

[BaalChatzaf]

Should the present Administration get a second term I expect to see a push for greater gun control and at the very least, a hefty surcharge on ammo-all in the name of the "public good".

We shall all be chained to the oars for "the public good".

ba'al Chatzaf

[Dglgmut]

Calvin:

How is this a complicated issue?

That's why I put "seemingly." When you argue with some who's anti-gun, don't they believe it's complicated? Do guns simply kill people?

I was speaking with regard to the proselytizing aim of the video.

[dennislmay]

Calvin:

How is this a complicated issue?

When you argue with some who's anti-gun, don't they believe it's complicated?

The people who you see in the mainstream media arguing the anti-gun point of view

seem to fall into a few different groups:

Marxists - feigning reasonable arguments.

People raised in or have become immersed in socialist/Marxist culture and actually

buy anti-gun arguments without critical reasoning or adequate understanding of

the topic.

People who live by emotional reasoning - can't be reasoned with and carefully

crafted emotional arguments will work every time.

The Marxists will claim it is a complicated issue as part of their smoke and mirrors

- this keeps the naive and emotional from doing the minor amount of research to

discover it is not complicated at all.

Dennis

[syrakusos]

The people who you see in the mainstream media arguing the anti-gun point of view seem to fall into a few different groups... Marxists ... People ... immersed in socialist/Marxist culture... People who live by emotional reasoning ...

Ayn Rand was none of the above. I will grant that perhaps like everyone really, Ayn Rand only engaged in hard reasoning to validate her emotional assumptions. Does that invalidate her claims?

Rand's thesis was not complicated. The only purpose of a handgun is to kill someone. You have no right to kill someone. Therefore, you have no right to a handgun. She allowed that this does not answer other questions about your right to self-defense. Thus, it is a complicated issue. It is a trope in Hollywood westerns that when you come into town, you leave your gun with the sheriff. In other movies, no one can have a gun in the saloon. I don't know if it was real or not, but it was understandable and acceptable to the audiences of those movies, very few of whom were mainstream media Marxists.

[caroljane]

The people who you see in the mainstream media arguing the anti-gun point of view seem to fall into a few different groups... Marxists ... People ... immersed in socialist/Marxist culture... People who live by emotional reasoning ...

Ayn Rand was none of the above. I will grant that perhaps like everyone really, Ayn Rand only engaged in hard reasoning to validate her emotional assumptions. Does that invalidate her claims?

Rand's thesis was not complicated. The only purpose of a handgun is to kill someone. You have no right to kill someone. Therefore, you have no right to a handgun. She allowed that this does not answer other questions about your right to self-defense. Thus, it is a complicated issue. It is a trope in Hollywood westerns that when you come into town, you leave your gun with the sheriff. I don't know if it was real or not, but it was understandable and acceptable to the audiences of those movies, very few of whom were mainstream media Marxists.

The people who you see in the mainstream media arguing the anti-gun point of view seem to fall into a few different groups... Marxists ... People ... immersed in socialist/Marxist culture... People who live by emotional reasoning ...

Ayn Rand was none of the above. I will grant that perhaps like everyone really, Ayn Rand only engaged in hard reasoning to validate her emotional assumptions. Does that invalidate her claims?

Rand's thesis was not complicated. The only purpose of a handgun is to kill someone. You have no right to kill someone. Therefore, you have no right to a handgun. She allowed that this does not answer other questions about your right to self-defense. Thus, it is a complicated issue. It is a trope in Hollywood westerns that when you come into town, you leave your gun with the sheriff. I don't know if it was real or not, but it was understandable and acceptable to the audiences of those movies, very few of whom were mainstream media Marxists.

Rand was reasonable and 100% correct.

[Backlighting]

I must disagree with the statement that "the only purpose of a handgun is to kill someone"

Target shooting kills no one and brings much joy to those who do it.

[syrakusos]

Right. Exceptions test the rules, of course. Many dangerous sports are controlled for the participants. Finnish rally racing lets anyone partiicpate, even children. Your car typically costs less than 1000 euros because one of the rules is that anyone can force a swap after the race. But, as with the high horsepower slalom, the forced trade is not something we advocate for society in general.

Mika Hakkinen on BBC here. (After training, during the open road race, the BBC host takes on an old man and a teenage girl.)

[dennislmay]

I must disagree with the statement that "the only purpose of a handgun is to kill someone"

Target shooting kills no one and brings much joy to those who do it.

Rand [and Peikoff] had at best a naive understand [average HS level] of all things defense

and military related. Worse they were in fact living in Marxist/Socialist infected urban

areas where Marxist anti-gun propganda ruled. I read everything Rand ever wrote except

some plays and some newspaper editorials. She spoke little on the subject and

clearly had thought extremely little about it. Peikoff in his radio show demonstrated the

thinking style of a central planner on the subject. Ignorant of the subject but sure he knew

what was best for everyone.

The subject matter is not complex - both Rand and Peikoff were ignorant on the subject

matter and it would have best if they had said nothing if they weren't willing to do the work

of understanding it.

A great many handguns are in fact used for hunting and backup guns while hunting. I

know this is an alien concept to those trapped in urban Marxist Meccas. The right

to self defense alone rules out anything Rand or Peikoff may have said on the subject.

The 2nd amendment is about throttling tyranny - inspired from within or without.

If Objectivism is interpreted to mean the kind of gun control Peikoff talked about then

it is dead to the world as far as I'm concerned - it will only lead to tyranny.

Again not a complicated subject - just unfortunate that Rand and Peikoff were ignorant

on the subject but spoke on it anyway.

Dennis

[Selene]

Michael:

Premises:

1) The only purpose of a handgun is to kill someone. <<<<This is patently false. It can prevent someone from being killed. It can provide food. It can provide pleasure.

2) You have no right to kill someone. <<<<This is also false, you have an absolute right to kill someone who is trying to kill you, or, someone you value.

3) Therefore, you have no right to a handgun. <<<<The conclusion falls from the dead weight of the two false statements that it is based on.

Adam

[dennislmay]

Michael:

Premises:

1) The only purpose of a handgun is to kill someone. <<<<This is patently false. It can prevent someone from being killed. It can provide food. It can provide pleasure.

2) You have no right to kill someone. <<<<This is also false, you have an absolute right to kill someone who is trying to kill you, or, someone you value.

3) Therefore, you have no right to a handgun. <<<<The conclusion falls from the dead weight of the two false statements that it is based on.

Adam

Exactly right - it is not a complicated issue.

Dennis

[dennislmay]

10 mm Glock is the minimum recommended handgun to have with you in areas

where black bears have been known to attack people - Minnesota farmers.

In Alaska with their larger predators - those out checking their cattle should

carry a rifle and either a .454 Casull or .460/.500 S&W or similar in case the

bear starts charging after they use the rifle first.

Of course there are hundreds of models of regular and blackpowder handguns

designed for hunting. Any land animal on Earth can be hunted with handguns.

Rand was a city girl and always was. Some of her writings indicate a kind

of distain for the culture of rural and small town living - until society collapses

then that where all sane people should go. Some of us don't wish to wait till

the last second and hope things turn out.

Dennis

[Selene]

10 mm Glock is the minimum recommended handgun to have with you in areas

where black bears have been known to attack people - Minnesota farmers.

In Alaska with their larger predators - those out checking their cattle should

carry a rifle and either a .454 Casull or .460/.500 S&W or similar in case the

bear starts charging after they use the rifle first.

Of course there are hundreds of models of regular and blackpowder handguns

designed for hunting. Any land animal on Earth can be hunted with handguns.

Rand was a city girl and always was. Some of her writings indicate a kind

of distain for the culture of rural and small town living - until society collapses

then that where all sane people should go. Some of us don't wish to wait till

the last second and hope things turn out.

Dennis

Thanks for the info.

I was always told that a 357 Magnum was the required handgun in Grisly Bear country, in addition to the rifle with serious stopping power.

A 357 will go through the motor block of a car. Tough weapon to control for someone like me with not a lot of arm strength. I have even seen women use a simple camera pod, or, tripod to rest the damn cannon on.

[dennislmay]

10 mm Glock is the minimum recommended handgun to have with you in areas

where black bears have been known to attack people - Minnesota farmers.

In Alaska with their larger predators - those out checking their cattle should

carry a rifle and either a .454 Casull or .460/.500 S&W or similar in case the

bear starts charging after they use the rifle first.

Of course there are hundreds of models of regular and blackpowder handguns

designed for hunting. Any land animal on Earth can be hunted with handguns.

Rand was a city girl and always was. Some of her writings indicate a kind

of distain for the culture of rural and small town living - until society collapses

then that where all sane people should go. Some of us don't wish to wait till

the last second and hope things turn out.

Dennis

Thanks for the info.

I was always told that a 357 Magnum was the required handgun in Grisly Bear country, in addition to the rifle with serious stopping power.

A 357 will go through the motor block of a car. Tough weapon to control for someone like me with not a lot of arm strength. I have even seen women use a simple camera pod, or, tripod to rest the damn cannon on.

Grisly bears are bigger than black bears but you have to be able to control a gun for it to do you any good. When one is running at you I've heard people don't notice recoil any more. If a .357 is as big as you can control it would be best to have it. A .357 Magnum is generally 5-6 shot [though 8 shot are available). A full size 10 mm Glock is 15+1 so you can start shooting at a bear as soon as it runs towards you and not worry you will run out of shells before it gets to you. An expert marksman with a 10 mm Glock can shoot a man size [bear size] silhouette 1 of 3 shots out to 300 yards. Hunters will often get the extended barrels and compensators as well.

One of my cousins always carried a 1911 .45ACP when checking his hogs. When I was a kid I saw a big sow eat the guts out of a lamb that weighed about what

I did at the time. If you fall down unarmed in a hog pen you might become supper.

3-4 years ago about 4 miles North of my place a 200 pound calf was drug up into a free by a panther. Another calf was killed nearby as well. One of my elderly cousins recalled the last wolf that lived in the area back when she was a kid. It was dragging off a calf by its foot when she saw it. The calf was killed and taken back to her den. Several people tracked it back and killed the wolf. Big predators and cattle/horses/sheep/chickens/ducks do not get along.

Brown bears kill full size cattle - nothing to fool with.

If bear attacks stats are as far off as deer car accident deaths in Missouri - multiply the number killed by 10 to arrive

at a realistic number. Politics drives deer death stats and I would expect the same of bear and mountain lions/panthers.

No body - no death right?

Dennis

[Brant Gaede]

My brother's best friend and his her were killed and eaten by a grizzly in 2003 in Alaska. They made a movie out of it. No guns, and the frying pan didn't work.

--Brant

[Backlighting]

10 mm Glock is the minimum recommended handgun to have with you in areas

where black bears have been known to attack people - Minnesota farmers.

In Alaska with their larger predators - those out checking their cattle should

carry a rifle and either a .454 Casull or .460/.500 S&W or similar in case the

bear starts charging after they use the rifle first.

Of course there are hundreds of models of regular and blackpowder handguns

designed for hunting. Any land animal on Earth can be hunted with handguns.

Rand was a city girl and always was. Some of her writings indicate a kind

of distain for the culture of rural and small town living - until society collapses

then that where all sane people should go. Some of us don't wish to wait till

the last second and hope things turn out.

Dennis

Thanks for the info.

I was always told that a 357 Magnum was the required handgun in Grisly Bear country, in addition to the rifle with serious stopping power.

A 357 will go through the motor block of a car. Tough weapon to control for someone like me with not a lot of arm strength. I have even seen women use a simple camera pod, or, tripod to rest the damn cannon on.

For me, a 44 magnum, 454 or 50 cal would accompany me if I ventured into bear country. A 357 just doesn't have the density/ weight of the the others. In this case, bigger is better.

[syrakusos]

Dennis and Adam, yes, of course, in Alaska or just about anywhere between cities - and most of America is between cities - a convenient weapon can be the difference between life and death. I have quipped that the taxonomic name for Grizzly Bear, ursus horribilis was given by the second person to find one. You can argue the periphery all you want. The fact is that weaponry is not required in a modern civilized society, and in fact, is contrary to the intent of commercial culture.

If we are going to have laws against aggression, then the means of aggression must also come under the law. I point out that not only is it illegal to pass counterfeit money, it is illegal to own the means of its production. Force and fraud: love 'em or leave 'em.

[Selene]

Dennis and Adam, yes, of course, in Alaska or just about anywhere between cities - and most of America is between cities - a convenient weapon can be the difference between life and death. I have quipped that the taxonomic name for Grizzly Bear, ursus horribilis was given by the second person to find one. You can argue the periphery all you want. The fact is that weaponry is not required in a modern civilized society, and in fact, is contrary to the intent of commercial culture.

If we are going to have laws against aggression, then the means of aggression must also come under the law. I point out that not only is it illegal to pass counterfeit money, it is illegal to own the means of its production. Force and fraud: love 'em or leave 'em.

Michael:

Having a weapon, in the case before us on this thread, a handgun, has nothing to do with force.

A handgun is more necessary in the cities, suburbs and exurbia now than ever before.

Your argument comparing the handgun to counterfeit money does not work. Additionally, anyone should be able to possess, in a free society, the means of its production that you mention. That is not a crime. Attempting to defraud someone is the crime. Possession of a handgun is not a crime,

It would be a crime if you used that handgun, which is an inert tool in it's holster, to rob a bank.

Do you not perceive the difference?

Adam

[Brant Gaede]

10 mm Glock is the minimum recommended handgun to have with you in areas

where black bears have been known to attack people - Minnesota farmers.

In Alaska with their larger predators - those out checking their cattle should

carry a rifle and either a .454 Casull or .460/.500 S&W or similar in case the

bear starts charging after they use the rifle first.

Of course there are hundreds of models of regular and blackpowder handguns

designed for hunting. Any land animal on Earth can be hunted with handguns.

Rand was a city girl and always was. Some of her writings indicate a kind

of distain for the culture of rural and small town living - until society collapses

then that where all sane people should go. Some of us don't wish to wait till

the last second and hope things turn out.

Dennis

Thanks for the info.

I was always told that a 357 Magnum was the required handgun in Grisly Bear country, in addition to the rifle with serious stopping power.

A 357 will go through the motor block of a car. Tough weapon to control for someone like me with not a lot of arm strength. I have even seen women use a simple camera pod, or, tripod to rest the damn cannon on.

For me, a 44 magnum, 454 or 50 cal would accompany me if I ventured into bear country. A 357 just doesn't have the density/ weight of the the others. In this case, bigger is better.

Ruger makes a carbine--or did--in the .44 mag. That's the least I would take with me. I own a .357, in the late 1950s described as the world's "most powerful handgun," but the calibre is exactly the same as the .38 Special, with a heavier bullet, longer cartridge so you couldn't load it into the .38 Special handgun, and more powder.

--Brant

why r u in bear country?

[Brant Gaede]

Generally, the bigger the game the bigger the bullet needed, even though if you knew where to put it only a 30/06 would bring down an African elephant, as one white hunter did for years. While velocity is much more important than mass in terms of deliverable energy, you have to get inside the beast to release that energy and for that you need mass. So, a big bullet for the elephant and a .223 for a man, in Vietnam, and today.

--Brant

[dennislmay]

From what I've read a 30-06 would be illegal to hunt elephants with in most countries - undersized and a military caliber. Military calibers are banned

for big game hunting in parts of Africa.

Dennis

[dennislmay]

The fact is that weaponry is not required in a modern civilized society, and in fact, is contrary to the intent of commercial culture.

So you're going to station a gestapo jack boot agent at every machine shop in commercial culture and homes to make sure hundreds of years

old technology to protect life and limb are not produced - so only the jack boots can decide the intent of commercial culture?

I can see you are serious - which makes me wonder if a few words by Rand about something she knew nothing about over-rules every other

aspect of her work. Why do you think Objectivism gets labeled a cult so often? Rand and Peikoff are/were allowed to make mistakes - and

this is an unfortunate example of a mistake contrary to the rest of the body of Rand's work. She was raised in a Marxist culture then lived

in cities with Marxist leaning culture. Taking away weapons is the first step to tyranny. If the US were not giving Western civilization a

free rider on security all those social democracies which don't permit gun ownership would have collapsed into total fascism or communism

by now.

It is not a complicated topic.

Dennis

[caroljane]

The fact is that weaponry is not required in a modern civilized society, and in fact, is contrary to the intent of commercial culture.

So you're going to station a gestapo jack boot agent at every machine shop in commercial culture and homes to make sure hundreds of years

old technology to protect life and limb are not produced - so only the jack boots can decide the intent of commercial culture?

I can see you are serious - which makes me wonder if a few words by Rand about something she knew nothing about over-rules every other

aspect of her work. Why do you think Objectivism gets labeled a cult so often? Rand and Peikoff are/were allowed to make mistakes - and

this is an unfortunate example of a mistake contrary to the rest of the body of Rand's work. She was raised in a Marxist culture then lived

in cities with Marxist leaning culture. Taking away weapons is the first step to tyranny. If the US were not giving Western civilization a

free rider on security all those social democracies which don't permit gun ownership would have collapsed into total fascism or communism

by now.

It is not a complicated topic.

Dennis

The fact is that weaponry is not required in a modern civilized society, and in fact, is contrary to the intent of commercial culture.

So you're going to station a gestapo jack boot agent at every machine shop in commercial culture and homes to make sure hundreds of years

old technology to protect life and limb are not produced - so only the jack boots can decide the intent of commercial culture?

I can see you are serious - which makes me wonder if a few words by Rand about something she knew nothing about over-rules every other

aspect of her work. Why do you think Objectivism gets labeled a cult so often? Rand and Peikoff are/were allowed to make mistakes - and

this is an unfortunate example of a mistake contrary to the rest of the body of Rand's work. She was raised in a Marxist culture then lived

in cities with Marxist leaning culture. Taking away weapons is the first step to tyranny. If the US were not giving Western civilization a

free rider on security all those social democracies which don't permit gun ownership would have collapsed into total fascism or communism

by now.

It is not a complicated topic.

Dennis

The fact is that weaponry is not required in a modern civilized society, and in fact, is contrary to the intent of commercial culture.

So you're going to station a gestapo jack boot agent at every machine shop in commercial culture and homes to make sure hundreds of years

old technology to protect life and limb are not produced - so only the jack boots can decide the intent of commercial culture?

I can see you are serious - which makes me wonder if a few words by Rand about something she knew nothing about over-rules every other

aspect of her work. Why do you think Objectivism gets labeled a cult so often? Rand and Peikoff are/were allowed to make mistakes - and

this is an unfortunate example of a mistake contrary to the rest of the body of Rand's work. She was raised in a Marxist culture then lived

in cities with Marxist leaning culture. Taking away weapons is the first step to tyranny. If the US were not giving Western civilization a

free rider on security all those social democracies which don't permit gun ownership would have collapsed into total fascism or communism

by now.

It is not a complicated topic.

Dennis

The fact is that weaponry is not required in a modern civilized society, and in fact, is contrary to the intent of commercial culture.

So you're going to station a gestapo jack boot agent at every machine shop in commercial culture and homes to make sure hundreds of years

old technology to protect life and limb are not produced - so only the jack boots can decide the intent of commercial culture?

I can see you are serious - which makes me wonder if a few words by Rand about something she knew nothing about over-rules every other

aspect of her work. Why do you think Objectivism gets labeled a cult so often? Rand and Peikoff are/were allowed to make mistakes - and

this is an unfortunate example of a mistake contrary to the rest of the body of Rand's work. She was raised in a Marxist culture then lived

in cities with Marxist leaning culture. Taking away weapons is the first step to tyranny. If the US were not giving Western civilization a

free rider on security all those social democracies which don't permit gun ownership would have collapsed into total fascism or communism

by now.

It is not a complicated topic.

Dennis

One above referenced social democracy, believes it is a complicated topic.

We do not live in Cold War mode anymore,and importation of American pistols does not improve our lives.

[Selene]

One above referenced social democracy, believes it is a complicated topic.

We do not live in Cold War mode anymore,and importation of American pistols does not improve our lives.

What social democracy are you referring to Carol?

[syrakusos]

The fact is that weaponry is not required in a modern civilized society, and in fact, is contrary to the intent of commercial culture.

So you're going to station a gestapo jack boot agent at every machine shop ...

I did not say that, or anything like it. I did not address enforcement at all. We did not even discuss the nature of the wrong itself or its remediation. Without being rigorous yet let me say that philosophically, I am closer to Selene in that if you have such a weapon and keep that fact secret, then a kind of legal agnosticism applies. (Perhaps my favorite quote from Ellen Johnson is that the invisible and the non-existent look a lot alike.) But, if you use that weapon to cause harm - Adam said rob a bank - then the full weight of social reprisals will fall upon you.

That "full weight" is another complicated issue. Prison is a waste of money. Community corrections based on reintegrative shaming works much better. Granted, also, that for reasons of genetics or diet or parenting or choice, some people will refuse the opportunity to improve their lot in life. In the past we exiled them. Today exile is more a matter of topology: we seal them in and us out, rather than there reverse, but the result is the same: they are excluded from all society. Perhaps execution would be merciful. Personally, I am opposed to it, but open to discussion of any point I have not previously considered on that topic.

The same holds true here. My experience in life and my education in criminology suggest that no one ever needs any weapon to deal with another human being. What, then, when the other person has a weapon? It's complicated. It is not so much what you do to them, though there is that. Their choice makes that their responsibilty. But what do you do to yourself when you take a life? Complicated...

Anyway, we have invested so much in what you call "Marxist" thinking that we have not developed high tech defenses. Shields, restraints, protections, shunts, ... electromotive, electromechanical, ceramic, monofilament, whiskers... who knows? It is an underdeveloped market. But I point out that the "conflict theory" of sociology is 100% Marxism and it seems to be your own basic assumption.

... which makes me wonder if a few words by Rand about something she knew nothing about ... Rand and Peikoff are/were allowed to make mistakes... a mistake contrary to the rest of the body of Rand's work. She was raised in a Marxist culture then lived in cities with Marxist leaning culture. ...

She lived through a war, a civil war, and a revolution. No one took away anyone's guns. There were lot of guns. Everywhere. It was why she wanted a single monopoly on retaliatory force.

Ayn Rand was the single best proponent of rational empiricism (objectivism) ever. So, what she said has some merit for those of us who share that worldview. Make of it what you will. But do not project your assumptions about other people on to me.

[Brant Gaede]

From what I've read a 30-06 would be illegal to hunt elephants with in most countries - undersized and a military caliber. Military calibers are banned

for big game hunting in parts of Africa.

Dennis

This was a professional hunter way, way back in the day. He used a head shot.

--Brant