ASSAULT WEAPON OWNERSHIP IRRATIONAL

One of the most basic fundamental conflicts in a democracy is that a majority tells the minority what to do. It is an amazing thing that individualist can live in a democracy. The only way I can explain it is that they live in some sort of Nash Equilibrium” a rationally arrived at social/cultural balance. People, to carry it to the absurd even criminals, may need handguns to protect themselves—that is rational. When I look at the furor over banning high capacity clips and assault weapons or resulting in statements that imply people need guns to protect themselves from their government, their irrationality staggers me.

The reason the subject came to mind was that I was trying to figure why a recent incident that occurred on North Carolina highways happened. At first, it appeared completely nonsensical. A state highway patrol officer stopped a car during in rush hour traffic—many, many witnesses—and was shot four times. I have no idea what the driver thought but here is a man who shot a representative of government. By what twisted logic could this man have thought he was protecting himself from the government. The startling thing is that he was acting rationally. He had committed a crime in another state and feared the officer would arrest him—deprive him of his liberty. To protect his freedom, he shot the patrol officer and drove away. He felt he had a chance to escape capture.

In contrast, what possible scenario can a person have in their mind when they object to the government banning assault weapon? The “individualist” with a handgun who shot the officer, knew he was in danger of being apprehended by a police officer, and logically could protect himself with a handgun, but what possible situation would an “individualist” have for needing an assault weapon designed to kill large numbers of people. Do they want assault weapons to protect them from an army or a “well-regulated militia”? This criminal in the car in North Carolina did not have a gun to kill people; he had it to protect himself: criminal but rational—like people who rob banks because that is where the money is.  An individual fighting an army is not rational it is it is not just stupid; it is crazy. Therefore, when he or she applies for a gun permit the “government” should ask if they want to buy an assault weapon. If they answer is yes, they should not be given a permit because they are mentally incompetent that is irrational. 

URL: firetreepub.blogspot.com Comments Invited and not moderated