In Leviathan We Trust – The Absurdity of Non-Totalitarian Gun Control

Please share!

Somewhere along the line, it seems as though we, caught up in delusions of grandeur in our modernity, forgot that there is a thing called evil. The narrative of progressivism seems to have instilled in our society the absurd idea that human society can move past the problems of violence and immorality that have plagued us in the past. Humans are not the problem. Humans are simply corrupted by external things.

Therefore, weapons, especially guns, are fundamentally evil and pointless. We should not even need them as means of defense since removing guns would remove most threats of violence unless the concealed bow and arrow came back into fashion.

But I would like to posit a different theory. Evil exists. Evil is why men senselessly open fire on helpless children in schools. Evil is why men drive large trucks down crowded roads. Evil is why men go on killing sprees with knives. Evil is why men weaponize pressure cookers in acts of terror. Faulting any of those objects faults a means to an end and ignores the true reason those means are used for evil purposes.

The progressive ideology that mankind can move past any and all evil nature as a collective whole is delusional. And as long as any evil persists in mankind, man must defend himself against those in his society who would harm him or those around him.

Robbing any man of the ability to effectively defend himself from the evil that necessarily persists in society without supplying adequate protection should be considered a crime. Robbing any man of the ability to defend himself by removing the most effective means of protection in the process of ineffectively removing one of many means by which evil may effectively be done to him without supplying adequate protection to compensate for his inability to defend himself is a level of idiocy deserving of a society-wide Darwin award.

But such lunacy is exactly what the civilized, progressive, and pitifully stupid West seems to be doing. Guns are simply the most effective means of self-defense. Assault can be done with literally anything if somebody is creative enough. And it can be devastating if the assailant has the right kind of perverted ingenuity.

Anything hot, pointy, sharp, heavy, flammable, or combustible could be an effective weapon. But unless somebody is Tony Stark, they probably cannot turn kitchen appliances into effective means of self-defense. And a common, easily carried item such as a knife is hardly any good in the hands of someone without training, and worthless against any kind of projectile or explosive (let alone a weaponized vehicle such as the tragedy in Nice).

Therefore, banning guns on any level effectively bans the right to effective self-defense.

banning guns on any level effectively bans the right to effective self-defense. Click To Tweet

So we must ask ourselves what we hope to gain from gun bans. Do we actually think that gun bans will prevent evildoers from doing evil? They will never be fully effective unless guns are universally eliminated. If there are guns anywhere, the wrong hands will certainly find them. Hence we have shootings in gun-free zones such as schools, widespread gun-violence in places such as Chicago which all but outlaw firearms altogether, and France which faces gun-violence despite nationally banning anything not used for sport or hunting (and very strictly enforcing that ban).

Secondly. guns are only one means of violence, and terrorists have proven to be quite resourceful at finding other ways even when guns are difficult to come by. Hence mass violence via a truck in Nice, France, knife attacks at Ohio State University, and a knife-problem so bad in England that knife bans have been a topic of discussion.

While it seems pathetic that some think that humans cannot be trusted with pointy objects, perhaps England is on the right track. Robbing citizens of the best means of self-defense while leaving would-be assailants with a wide array of options before them for their evil deeds is simply absurd. Therefore, there are two rational options.

Either a totalitarian Leviathan state must be formed in which the state effectively and unfailingly bans any kind of sharp, pointy, flammable, heavy, combustible, fast, or generally dangerous object while establishing a big-brother-like police force which can spot, confront, and stop any evil deed before it can be executed. Or citizens must be granted access to the means to defend themselves with restrictions that only apply in instances in which banning guns effectively removes all threats (such as restricted government buildings).

If we desire any kind of gun ban, we must establish a Hobbesian kind of Leviathan in which we have an irresistible government that can effectively protect itself and its citizens from all evil. Anything less would pointlessly leave citizens exposed to the kind of evil to be avoided.

But we are no strangers to such a scenario. We ban guns in schools without providing any kind of guards to protect our children. We ban guns on college campuses where there is no protection at worst and thinly-stretched, ineffectively equipped security at best. We try to keep guns out of various states and cities and even countries yet wonder why our citizens are slaughtered like sheep in a wolf-infested forest when we do not establish the kind of totalitarian state necessary to keep evil from reaching citizens when citizens cannot defend themselves from it.

This is the absurdity to which the progressive West has been led. We make our citizens sheep while pretending that wolves do not exist. We refuse to submit ourselves to a totalitarian state even though a totalitarian state is the only thing that can even theoretically protect us from evil when we cannot protect ourselves.

Of course, the reader would be right to be skeptical that even a Hobbesian or Orwellian government would be desirable or capable of protecting its exposed citizens. I certainly hope that any and all readers despise the idea of a nanny-government slapping the hands of childlike citizens whenever they try to hold something dangerous. And if we are to reject such a totalitarian state while recognizing the reality of evil from which we must defend ourselves, we must reject the absurd gun restrictions reducing children, students, and the public in general to fish in a barrel.

Kyle Huitt
Follow me

Kyle Huitt

Part of the multitude that has lost their faith, but part of the few that has returned to it. This blog is my attempt to describe why I returned to the faith, and to maybe prevent somebody else from leaving it in the first place. Studying philosophy and history at Hillsdale College. Member of Delta Tau Delta fraternity.
Kyle Huitt
Follow me
(Visited 16 times, 1 visits today)
Please share!