I don’t agree with everything in Michael’s  take-down of a comment by Eric R. to my post, “Unethical Quote of the Month: The Washington Post,” but as an example of the genre ( mastered on Ethics Alarms by the 2011 Commenter of the Year tgt and others), it’s a gem. The main point, that the Second Amendment has significant symbolic value as a right that reminds the government that the citizens of a democracy will not bare their throats to central power, is a crucial one, which I touched on in an earlier Ethics Alarms post. An armed insurrection against the government would be a catastrophe, of course. Still, while those Americans who believe that arming citizens against possible government tyranny trust too little, the citizens who argue that the government should be able to disarm the populace in the name of safety trust far too much.

I did remove one small non-substantive part of the post, because I really dislike mockery as a device on Ethics Alarms (the unedited comment is still under the original post.) I particularly think Michael’s identification of the reasons underlying the recent spate of mad dog killings is seriously off the mark. My own list, in order of influence would be…

1. The difficulty of getting seriously disturbed individuals institutionalized, and the lack of places to keep and treat them.
2. The availability of assault-type weapons to such disturbed individuals.
3. The failure to enforce existing gun regulations
4. The increasing difficulty and complexity of life generally, making it harder for those who are poor, poorly trained, not especially bright, or emotionally fragile to compete and succeed.
5. The pervasive media, which creates false norms of success and happiness that are unachievable for most Americans.
6. The culture of guns and violence, which is intensified by the entertainment media, but which is also a core American characteristic that isn’t going away.
7. The publicity given to mass murderers by the news media.

But I digress.

Here is Michael’s tough Comment of the Day, to the post “Unethical Quote of the Month: The Washington Post”. The bold sections below are quotes from Eric’s comment:

“To ignore the differences between a 1770′s neophyte America without a standing army and a population of about 2.5M that is under the shadow of a much more mature, more militarily powerful country and 21st century America is absolutely insane.”

Also known as the “2nd Amendment is soooooo 18th century” argument.

Unfortunately, that logically fallible argument applies to the 1st Amendment…hey, it’s as old fashioned as the 2nd!!!

Just join one of the state-oriented media outlets if you want your opinion heard on the public forum!!

“As a society we have chosen to prepare and arm various standing armies to protect us against enemies foreign and domestic. We have the US Military, FBI, and the CIA. At the state level we have the National Guard, [State]BI and Highway Patrol/State Police. At the county level we have the Sheriff’s Department, many with full tactical SWAT teams, and at the city level we have local police departments. If you want “nearly” unregulated access to arms you need to join one of these “well regulated militias.”

Since this one is rife with fallacies, I’m not wasting time on it other than to say ALL of those agencies save the one I will discuss shortly are historically NON-analogous to the Militia. The militia was always considered the Body of Armed Citizens, never the national guard until corrupting legislation in the early 20th century was enacted.

The National Guard is a modern corruption of what was considered the Militia. The Militia Act of 1903 began the corruption of the Militia by handing its funding source to the national level of the federal government as a reaction to poorly prepared militia unit’s performance in the Spanish American War (1st time the Militia was called out for foreign invasions – notably, not the intent of the Founding Fathers who had hoped to avoid foreign entanglements)

Shortly thereafter, the final submission of the Militias to Federal Authority was the National Defense Act of 1914, which only notionally left the National Guard as it had begun to be called under State Authority.

So, no, the National Guard is NOT the militia any more than that other plethora of ENFORCEMENT Agencies you listed is.

If you bother to read the relationships in the Federal Government that the Founder’s envisioned, you would see the IMPORTANT role of the Militia. The right to keep and bear arms is not one that was GRANTED by the federal government, like the ENTIRE Bill of Rights, these rights were seen as to exist NATURALLY, but were so important they needed to be codified.

The federal government had a standing army for the defense of the nation. They knew a standing army could be employed tyrannically, and therefore invested in the separate states, the authority to wield their own checks against that standing army: notably the ability of the State Governor’s to call out the State’s Militia.

The individual citizens being the 3rd level of checks and balances in this equal separation of FORCE, were recognized as having every right to bear the same weapons that the infantrymen of the Standing Army bore. The State Militia repositories held the heavier weapons that may be necessary for opposition to the Standing Army.

Do some research before making emotional, irrational assertions, especially those as stupid as claiming the FBI, et al, is a modern incarnation of the Militia.

“If you’re going to argue that you need to be as well armed as any of these militias you are off your rocker. This would require unfettered access to small and large caliber automatic weapons, rocket launchers, anti-tank weapons, armored personal carriers, Stinger SAMs, F-35s, B-2 Bombers, and a couple of W88s in my garage in case the local sheriff decides to infringe on my rights.”

Duh. Which is why the original intent of State Militias under authority of their State Governor’s was for those State Militias to be the repository of those heavier weapons. When you pop off with idiotic comments like that, you lose ALL credibility with any 2nd Amendment type immediately.

“Furthermore, any thoughts about taking up arms against the repressive government is nothing more than a pre-pubescent Red Dawn wet dream. Our country and our society have evolved greatly since 1776 and we have ways of addressing grievances with our government. Any attempt to take up arms against our own government will get you arrested (at best) or shot.”

That translates immediately into “those who forget history are doomed to repeat it”. Our society (being a sub-component of Western Civilization) has been nothing BUT advancing since the founding…HA! Men and governments are JUST as fallible now as they were then. IF we’ve been on a long trek of improvement, there would have been no forced Indian removals, no reservations, no civil war, no income tax, and no other evils enacted by the federal level of government.

The constitution and its system of checks and balances was created BECAUSE the founder’s new man and government were fallible!
I suppose the founder’s all just had pre-pubescent wet-dreams back in 1776.

”Making all firearms hold less than 4 rounds does nothing to infringe on your rights to own guns, but simply puts reasonable regulations on the gun itself. If that’s too much, then make all firearms with a capacity of more than 3 rounds a Class III weapon subject to background check and regulation as enumerated by the first part of the 2nd Amendment that people all too often forget.”

 The ‘regulated’ militia was because militias had to have RULES of ORGANIZATION and FUNCTION to work…just like the military today has UCMJ and Doctrine governing its behavior.

”I am under no illusions that anything will change after Newtown. We’ve for too long allowed our government to pass Swiss cheese legislation that too often exacerbates the problem (Re: assault weapons ban that was merely cosmetic, or clip ban that allowed existing high capacity clips to remain in public hands, or the prevision that allowed Law Enforcement Agencies to sell their high capacity clips to the public even after the ban. I could go on.) More than that though, incidents like Newtown show the power of guns in the hands of any ordinary citizen. “Sorry about the kids, but just think, if he can mow down 27 people in under 5 minutes just imagine what I can do when the socialists come to enslave me.”

This is all crying about how we don’t live in the muddle-headed Utopia you dream about in your protected little home of non-thinking State-drones. Here: WELCOME TO THE WORLD. It is an ugly, cold, dangerous place. Our country is not immune to these dangers.

Here’s where the idiotic fantasy that Western Civilization can be a utopia comes from: The post World War 2 Pax Americana that was established by an overwhelming Domination of world politics by western powers led by America essentially diminished to relatively non-existent levels the dangers which you bemoan for over 3 generations!

That is enough time for anyone to forget that America and the Western powers were just as susceptible to dangers at home as well as abroad. It allowed for a false psychological comfort. Guess what, that post WW2 pax Americana is slowly waning, so much so that we are being faced with REAL LIFE on the cultural level again.

Here’s what people ought to be addressing: The break-down of the 2 parent (father and mother) nuclear family. That is the cause of most of the psychological grief that leads to these instances of violence. But hey, it’s easier to blame guns, huh?