guns & purses (was Re: guns & crime)

[JKSCHW at aol.com]

Oh, James, James. Do you too buy into the silly idea that my right to buy a 
.357 or even an AR-14 protects me  against tyranny, that the Michigan Militia 
would stand a chance against the 101st Airborne if it came to that? --jks

In a message dated Tue, 17 Oct 2000  9:41:53 AM Eastern Daylight Time, James 
Heartfield <Jim at heartfield.demon.co.uk> writes:

<< > 
>``Why, it's time for gun-loving men to start carrying a purse.''
>Yoshie

Now this is a case for Freudian analysis. Stand and deliver!

In his book Militarism and Anti-Militarism, Karl Liebknicht made the
case for the legalisation of firearms as a democratic demand. If the
people are armed then the state has lost its monopoly on the means of
force.

I guess the American example shows that the ideological grip of the
powers-that-be over the masses means that the literal monopoly of force
can be relaxed without jeopardising state power.

All the same, I find it hard to believe that you could argue for a
disarming of the populace without reinforcing their dependence upon the
state.
-- 
James Heartfield

 >>