The Anarchist
Yellow Belt
I figured out what that meant a long time ago.
I thought I would apply the meaning right now...just because.
Think of it this way; "There is no gun." There is you, and your desire to survive. Now, given this, the weapons you "should be allowed to have" (we're just disregarding the obvious, that no person, or people, or institution has a moral 'right' to draw the line for you, period!) can only be viewed through the scope of relativity. Any weapon that is effective relative to the threat you are facing is acceptable to possess, regardless of anything that can be said, or thought of which opposes the notion. THIS is the correct notion.
Now, back to "there is only you". I believe this to be the real truth here. I do not expect my argument to convince anyone, however I hope that it can force them to be honest: Their argument is against me, against my person.
Oe example is that I can create "illegal weapons" if I want, and yet "I must be punished. I must be taught a lesson." So, how can these "laws" be anything other than another way to control me and nothing more than that?
As I have said, some people want this, but all I want is for them to come on out and say it. I cannot determine if someone is an enemy if they just say "I believe in reasonable restrictions", a lot of people say that. Those who can be convinced already are convinced. Those who cannot be will never be. Being a martial artist, I must know my enemies, and this is not an "argument", it is a tool to identify my enemies, and nothing more.
This is, however, an interesting discussion, wouldn't you say, reader?
I thought I would apply the meaning right now...just because.

Think of it this way; "There is no gun." There is you, and your desire to survive. Now, given this, the weapons you "should be allowed to have" (we're just disregarding the obvious, that no person, or people, or institution has a moral 'right' to draw the line for you, period!) can only be viewed through the scope of relativity. Any weapon that is effective relative to the threat you are facing is acceptable to possess, regardless of anything that can be said, or thought of which opposes the notion. THIS is the correct notion.
Now, back to "there is only you". I believe this to be the real truth here. I do not expect my argument to convince anyone, however I hope that it can force them to be honest: Their argument is against me, against my person.
Oe example is that I can create "illegal weapons" if I want, and yet "I must be punished. I must be taught a lesson." So, how can these "laws" be anything other than another way to control me and nothing more than that?
As I have said, some people want this, but all I want is for them to come on out and say it. I cannot determine if someone is an enemy if they just say "I believe in reasonable restrictions", a lot of people say that. Those who can be convinced already are convinced. Those who cannot be will never be. Being a martial artist, I must know my enemies, and this is not an "argument", it is a tool to identify my enemies, and nothing more.
This is, however, an interesting discussion, wouldn't you say, reader?
