1 In 9 Americans Still Believe Political Violence Is Sometimes Justified [More]
Really? What the hell kind of sanctimonious virtue signaling is this? Zero Hedge thinks a violence monopoly is preferable?
Maybe if we could beef those numbers up it would discourage more of it happening. As I wrote 25 years ago in my GUNS and AMMO piece “You Say You Want a Revolution”:
But that’s ok. As long as such uncertainty exists, the Second Amendment is doing its job. As long as government fears an armed populace, and based on all the idiot laws they’re trying to pass, they sure must, a powerful check on tyranny remains in place. After all, it is an evident truth that the strength of our nation can be measured by its freedom, and the Second Amendment is the key bellwether for this freedom. We can see in its erosion the breakdown of trust between government and the governed, and the attendant instability and conflict that is inevitable when this happens.
The seemingly paradoxical truth is, if you want to create a stable, peaceful and free society, where a Chechnya-style conflict becomes the unlikeliest of possibilities, you must guarantee that the whole people can arm themselves to the teeth. For only by making the cost of infringing our rights too high can we make those who would abridge them afraid to act. Just as, at the individual level, a criminal avoids a potential victim who may be armed, so too does this work on a societal scale.
[Via bondmen]
