Cowardice is Not a Virtue

Those clamoring for “gun control,” particularly right after some spectacular and dramatic shooting, seem to think they are demonstrating how compassionate, enlightened, civilized and responsible they are. In reality, they are doing something which is both foolish and cowardly. Then again, most vocal proponents of “gun control” seem to care more about how they look to others, than they do about actually doing anything useful. (Of course, that is true of almost anyone who loudly and conspicuously advocates a “government” solution to anything.)

First and foremost, pushing a “legislative” solution always amounts to condoning a violent solution. “Laws” are not polite suggestions; they are threats of force. “Gun control,” while usually framed in vague, euphemistic terms by its proponents, is gun violence. It is politicians threatening to send men with guns after any mere peasant who possesses something that the masters say they are not allowed to possess.

So, for example, anyone who condones the outlawing of semi-auto military style rifles is, from his place of irresponsible cowardice, condoning violence against me personally (I own an AR-15), based on his own ignorance and/or desire to appear compassionate.

But “gun control” advocates are not just ignorant and cowardly; they are also massively hypocritical. I have yet to meet any “gun control” proponent who wants any weapons taken away from agents of the state. Indeed, they very much want “government” enforcers to be heavily armed with all sorts of weapons of war, and then hope they come running when some mere peasant goes berserk.

All of those conspicuously “caring” Hollywood doofuses, for example, calling for “gun control” in the wake of some shooting or other, are essentially conveying this message: “If something really bad is happening, I have no intention of trying to stop it myself, I don’t even want the ability to stop it, and I don’t trust anyone else to have the desire or machinery to stop it, except for agents of the ruling class.”

They are projecting their own irresponsibility and immaturity onto everyone else, assuming that because all they would do in a crisis is hide in a corner and wait for “the authorities” to save their sorry asses (good luck with that), they think that everyone else should be forced to do likewise. They are scared little children who could never imagine taking it upon themselves to stop evil from happening, so all they can think to do is whine to their political masters to please try to make all the other “children” helpless too. And they think that counts as them doing something.

What makes it worse is that they wear their pathetic helplessness (mental and physical) with such pride, as if it is a badge of honor. The pretend to be anti-violence, while condoning massive state violence all over the place, including against all those people who do take it upon themselves to be unpaid defenders of everyone around them.

One of the strangest things to watch is an advocate of victim disarmament (“gun control”) trying to talk down to those of us who take on the extremely serious responsibility of having the means and willingness to use deadly force if some psycho (public or private) decides to go crazy.

No one needs weapons like this!!

Every time I hear a “gun control” advocate say something like that, I know he is lying, to himself and everyone else. What he actually means is, “We pathetic little peasants should never be allowed to possess such things, but the political masters and their underlings (who started out as peasants) should definitely have weapons like that, and so much more!

“Gun control” proponents are in no way anti-gun; They are not at all advocating doing away with the weapons entirely; they are condoning instead a violently enforced monopoly on owning such weapons, by the very gang which is responsible for more theft and murder than any other entity in history (namely, “government”). And they are specifically clamoring to have agents of the state use their guns to forcibly disarm others who haven’t threatened or harmed anyone.

And that’s both immoral and stupid. It would be more understandable (albeit still naive and misguided) if they wished for some magic button to make all guns disappear, but instead they are proudly cheering to have the most heavily armed gang in the world (the United States “government”) disarming everyone else. In short, they are thinking and acting like stupid, helpless children who are trying to look compassionate.

If you actually want to protect the innocent and reduce violent aggression, there are two things you should do: 1) Stop advocating the biggest example of violent aggression in the world (“government”) and become a voluntaryist, and; 2) Get a freaking gun, learn how to use it, and become one of the people able and willing to actually resist and combat the sociopaths and thugs of the world.

If you’re too philosophically or physically cowardly to do either, then just quietly hide somewhere and hope that someone with more courage than you, and more weapons than you, saves your sorry ass. But stop projecting your irresponsibility onto everyone else by begging the ruling class to make everyone else as helpless and pathetic as you.

Save as PDFPrint

Written by 

Larken Rose is an anarchist author best known for challenging the IRS to answer questions about the federal tax liability of citizens, and being put in prison with no questions answered. He is the author of The Most Dangerous Superstition.