Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles; site ea.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!ea!mwm
From: mwm@ea.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: gunpoint
Message-ID: <22400013@ea.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 20-Sep-84 16:49:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: ea.22400013
Posted: Thu Sep 20 16:49:00 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 01:19:39 EDT
References: <542@gloria.UUCP>
Lines: 27
Nf-ID: #R:gloria:-54200:ea:22400013:000:1224
Nf-From: ea!mwm    Sep 20 15:49:00 1984

/***** ea:net.politics / gloria!colonel / 11:53 pm  Sep 18, 1984 */
>>	Perhaps we who are libertarians are just a little more
>>	concerned at how tacky it is to point guns at people and force
>>	them to go along with us (however well-intentioned the cause).

"Tacky" is hardly the word!  And those of us who are not libertarians
accept that in any society the people with guns and followers will
force us to go along with them.  When central goverment relinquishes
or loses this power, gangs assume it.
-- 
Col. G. L. Sicherman
...seismo!rochester!rocksanne!rocksvax!sunybcs!gloria!colonel
/* ---------- */

But does it have to be that way? A libertarian government (government ==
those with the guns) would only use force to dissuade others from the use
of force [Ok, I concede, that would be an ideal libertarian government,
with ideal people. Probably not with real people.]

Since the US doesn't have such a governmnet, we support the "gang" that
comes closest to doing what we want, as do the non-libertarians. The
difference is, if our "gang" came into power, you would be free to do what
you wanted until you started interfering with someone else's freedom to do
so. How many other "gangs" is that true for?