Excellent TED talk given by a General from the Netherlands...

[BaiHu]

expressing perfectly why the gun is such a great tool for peace.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjAsM...layer_embedded

[Corlissimo]

That was very good indeed. Thanks for posting it!

[Suvorov]

While he makes some valid points, I can not abide by his advocacy of a "state monopoly on the use of arms."

[BaiHu]

Agreed, but that's pretty good reasoning from a socialist society's general. I know they're a constitutional monarchy, but so is England and look at their stance.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

[MDS]

While he makes some valid points, I can not abide by his advocacy of a "state monopoly on the use of arms."

I believe his words were "monopoly on the legitimate use of violence." It's the defining characteristic of a government - I don't mean that in any vague or subjective moral sense, but as a matter of practical reality. Where there is no such monopoly, we say there is no rule of law. In places where, eg, a warlord has this monopoly, we agree that he is the de facto government. Even in the US, we derive our rkba from the government, complete with prerequisites and restrictions.

Maybe I missed it, but I didn't hear anything in this talk about the individual rkba, only about how the armed forces of free countries are an essential component of that freedom...and I think most of us can agree with that! :flag:

[LOKNLOD]

Even in the US, we derive our rkba from the government, complete with prerequisites and restrictions.

At the risk of having put words in your mouth, or fingers as it were, and read too much into your statement, we derive our RKBA from our inalienable rights endowed by our creator (or inherent to our humanity, if the creator angle is a red herring to some), and that our gov't has recognized and enshrined that right, as a guarantor, not as the granter.

[MDS]

At the risk of having put words in your mouth, or fingers as it were, and read too much into your statement, we derive our RKBA from our inalienable rights endowed by our creator (or inherent to our humanity, if the creator angle is a red herring to some), and that our gov't has recognized and enshrined that right, as a guarantor, not as the granter.

Fair point, I don't disagree. (Except for the part about putting fingers in my mouth, that's just odd. ) I kind of glossed over it because it's a bit tangential to the distinction I was trying to make about the video...

[Suvorov]

I realize he did say "use of violence" but with regard to the other comments he made I think he makes it pretty clear that he is absolutely statist in his views on who should have access to arms. That said, I do agree with much of what he said and his ability to convey this message to what must have been an almost entirely hopophobic crowd. To expand on much of what he said, I think a strong argument can be made that the gun is one of the primary factors that has allowed the "constitutional democracy" to flourish in the last 500 years. While they did exist in pre-gun times, they were certainly no where as widespread and the firearm gave the conscripted levy a chance to take down a mounted nobleman who had the luxury of being able to devote his life to the use of arms, thus leveling the playing field.

[jstyer]

At the risk of having put words in your mouth, or fingers as it were, and read too much into your statement, we derive our RKBA from our inalienable rights endowed by our creator (or inherent to our humanity, if the creator angle is a red herring to some), and that our gov't has recognized and enshrined that right, as a guarantor, not as the granter.

Go try and conceal your pistol in Cali, or another anti-gun state... Then see how good of a job the Federal Gov. is doing on being a "guarantor" of your rights.

[MDS]

I think he makes it pretty clear that he is absolutely statist in his views on who should have access to arms.

Ah, gotcha. I didn't get any sense of what his views are on individual RKBA. I felt like he stayed pretty "on message" in terms of the role of well-supported armed forces in maintaining freedom. Your original comment makes a lot more sense, now that I know you got the impression that he opposes the individual RKBA. Thanks for clarifying...