Writing an essay - help needed!

oh dear,

whilst i am not a redneck or hillbilly, i do have some cousins who are.

the big starting place in weapons theory begins with initiation of use of force.

who and under what circumstances can/should one use force?

defence of self? loved ones? property nesessary for continuation of life?

why?

once one has made that determination. argument over the tools involved in the use of force is less arduous.

look for the essay "A nation of cowards."

rms/pa

HMM! Why is it that I sense a "troll", especially with the nick of "Classical Liberal"? Add to that, you're asking us "rednecks and hillbillies" for TECHNICAL advice? Durn, I done had to look up the meaning of "pragmatic"! I thought that it had something to do with a "prag" that was automatic, but I didn't figger out what a "prag" was!

Sorry if I have offended you, but I think that I'll pass on giving you my thoughts and suggestions.

I'd suggest that you include in your research both the "Federalist Papers" and the "Anti-Federalist Papers", from the period during which the Constitution was written. You'll find that leaders on both sides of the political aisle were unanimous in their conviction that arming the people was the only sure way to prevent future tyranny, and that this was an innate and inalienable right - which is why it's in the section of the Bill of Rights reserved for such pre-existing rights, not conferred by the Constitution, but recognized by it as already being in existence.

As you can see... you will probably not get the type of responses you were hoping for. Because you start your thread with "Greetings, American Rednecks and Hillbillies", you come off as being arrogant and condescending.

In case you’re not familiar with the term “troll”, as it has been applied hear, it means someone that is intentionally trying to upset the populace of the forum. It is not uncommon for Pro-RKBA forums to experience trolls. Generally they call us names, or just yell about how wrong we are. Additionally, they tend to be “liberals” or more correctly “leftists”, so your name is simply triggering some additional red flags. Trolls can also be as spies for the Anti-RKBA side, simply keeping track of our interest and trying to figure us out. I’m sure this happens on both sides.

Based on the rest of your post, it doesn’t necessarily appear that you meant any harm or disrespect. But you started your post by putting people on defense, and you’re sure to see some extra resistance, sarcasm, and general hostility as a result.

The fact that you are European is of little regard. However, there is a notion that you will not inherently understand our concepts or our view of our Second Amendment. This is simply considering the differences in cultures. The biggest notion that comes to mind is that many European nations see their people as Subjects, while those in the US are considered Citizens. I mean no disrespect, and I admit that I don’t know a lot about Sweden (Government, culture or people). This notion of Europeans is largely based upon the fact that the US is often made fun of. Consider that we are often called Cowboys or worse by those in Europe – and all of this from the differences between the two cultures. Europe sees us as cowboys, we see Europe as socialists - considering that the US stresses the individual, whilst Europe stresses the collective. Or at least this is my understanding of the situation.

You may want to respond with a more detailed insight of your understanding of the issues you are asking, as well as your position, and what you’re trying to accomplish with your report. Once you have done this, perhaps the forum will get past the stigma of a possible troll and actually provide you with some insight.

Regards,

Cyanide

I didn't mean that that was how I felt or thought of Europeans, just that some people do have that view. As in it is a common stereotype - It's just a view of some.

I know that "Classical Liberal' has a totally different context than that referring to socialists. I'm just stating that some automatically correlate any form of "liberal" as being in regards to "leftists/socialists".

The founding fathers of this country were classical liberals. Today's classical liberals are pretty much the libertarians - in which my thinking is heavily aligned with.

Cyanide

Sweden has law schools?

What ever happened to the good old days when they just settled things with trial by combat?

What do I know, I'm Danish and have a major attitude problem with other "Scandahoovians" anyway.

Especially the rude and condescending ones that want other people to do their research work for them.

Could always Google GunFacts as a starting point I guess.

Someone in the US government wrote a very good piece on the history of the 2nd amendment. I think it came out of the Attorney General's office. Perhaps someone with a memory will recall it and supply a link.

Why ask us hairy knuckle dragging neanderthals for advice? Isn't that the general perception the sqeaky clean liberals with their noses high in the air have about us savage, unsophisticated unga bungas? Our advice to you shouldn't amount to a hill of beans.

If you haven't seen this site yet, it has a lot of information that should be useful to your paper:

http://www.guncite.com/

Try Lew Rockwell's site

I interpreted your name in the same way as Cyanide 357... "classical liberal" is close to today's libertarians, who are in favor of government not bothering the citizenry.

In that vein, a good place to find libertarian essays on the subject is http://www.lewrockwell.com. A quick search (using the google box at the bottom of the page) yielded a couple of good sounding hits like "Gun Control Does Not Work" and "Gun Control and Genocide". Generally the essays on this site are very well reasoned and have good references which may aid in your research.

Good luck,
highdesert

I would start with a historical perspective on the formation of our government. It was based on "checks and balances" as mentioned in some of the reading above. WE THE PEOPLE is a part of the government so aside from the different branches having checks and balances over each other THE PEOPLE have the greatest say. In most instances the First and 15th (plus additions) take care of a majority of unpopular opinion but if it was to become too oppressive we have the ability to react as a people based on the Second.

What government wants that hanging above them? One that was formed By the People, for the People.

Where in Sweden are you? Have you been able to make it to the U.S.?

It's okay, CL, I know enough Swedes that I smiled when I read your first post.

We would love to help you write a great essay but if you address the forum that way, do you expect us to give you a friendly response?

a) There's nothing wrong with rural people. Rural people tend to have less experience in travel, less education, less money and less city manners, but they also are the ones who grow our food, are the source of our culture (where do you think Beethoven got so many of his inspirations from?), and are part of our society. Anyway, there are plenty of scoundrels with money, education and city manners.

b) I'm guessing that most of the people on this board are not rural people. Some of us, like me, live in some of America's biggest, most expensive and most sophisticated cities and jet around Europe for half the year (I've probably been to more European countries than you have). Some of us, like me, have higher degrees from top universities and have traveled extensively. Some of us are not American. There are people on this board of all different religions and races.

Yes, I've been to the US once, when I was 6. Thinking of going there this year but what's making me uneasy at the prospect is the thought of your fascist airport security policies (which are implemented in many other countries also).

Click to expand...

Yeah they are quite offensive and upsetting. I wish they would leave us alone. The whole TSA thing is a big make-work program.

Greetings Swedish Pansy Commie.

For your philosophy section, check out the book "Nation of Cowards" by Jeffery Snyder. This is a detailed treatment of the ethics of gun ownership and self-defense (and a strong critique of anti-gun arguments).