SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Libertarian Discussion Forum
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Liatris Spicata who wrote (4321)10/10/2000 5:42:37 PM
From: Jim S  Read Replies (1) of 13060
 
Thanks for the post, Larry. I think it only makes sense that a poor, poorly educated, and very rural population would take personal protection and food very seriously. It defies logic (mine, anyway <g>) that anyone who had to depend on their own resources would not use the necessary tools. I would think that people of the time would sooner lose an ax than their firearm.

In England at the time, only nobility could bear arms, either guns or swords, and it was a point of considerable contention to the undertrodden. There is a fair comparison as to the rationale for those rules to today's anti-gun environment -- the danger from the criminal element. The nobility thought that only they (and the police and military of course) had the courage and common sense commensurate with the responsibility of bearing arms.

Or, so they said. Sound familiar?

jim
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News