I'm not about to go blow anything up. I don't have the temperment, or the knowledge, or the skill, or the risk tolerance.
But where I got into this was in feeling that McVeigh had some legitimate issues, but chose a wrong target. I don't see why the government should feel it can tromp all over people and not suffer any cost for it. IMO the government killed those people at Waco just as surely as McVeigh killed the people in Oklahoma City. But the government says, hey, we can do this and not be brought to account, because the only one who can bring the government to account is the government itself. Duh.
This is why the 2nd amendment included the provision for local militas, so that there would be small, local, armed citizen groups in position to resist excess government exercises of power. They knew back then the dangers of big government. They set up a mechanism to make sure that the people were in a position to resist government abuses.
Jefferson's position wasn't "sure, I would like the government to back off." His position was "Friend government, thee has gone too far, I am pointing a rifle at thy body, I suggest the backs off NOW."
There's a certain appeal to that position. I'm not ready to take up arms myself, yet, but if I were younger, if I didn't have a family, if I had the skill and knowledge and had been taught to kill, if I hadn't been sucked in by the lure of wealth and comfort -- that is, if I were a McVeigh -- I would be mighty tempted. But I would, I hope, have been smart enough to pick the right target. |
