Risk

And assuming responsibility.

Been chewing on a thought. It’s human nature to be risk averse. It transfers to politics, of course, but it’s everywhere. Corporations would rather not have risk. Investors like to minimize it. So you may notice that regulations on business is onerous, but is often halfway GOOD for the corporations that play ball. Bill Gates didn’t want to deal with the expense of dealing with Washington DC, so he didn’t ‘waste’ money on Lobbyists in the 90’s. But his competitors did and he got into a sticky wicket. Now he’s all over that Jahwm, spending the Benjamins, buying the politicians, and no one talks about MS being a monopoly anymore. He plays ball.

Playing ball helps add costs to the up and comers that might dethrone the big guys. It raises the bar on the break-in price to enter the big leagues. Corporations aren’t capitalist. They are corporatists. Regulation alleviates risk, and cost compliance is fine as long as it is universally applied. An extra $20 added to the cost of a $300 computer OS is passed on to the consumer. It’s why corporations give to regulating Republicans and why they give to socialist Democrats.

If you want to go from nothing to the big leagues it’s easiest to start with something wholly new, young capitalist entrepenuer.


Risk means responsibility. Risk is a reason to worry about failure. And it is EASIER to not have to be responsible or worried. A natural human condition. Yet no one wants to think of them selves as irresponsible. Better to wave you hands, say a magic word and do away with EVERYONES worries and responsibilities. Of course, everyone has to go along with that fantasy.

Most people VOTE to maintain this fantasy, and don’t care if it violates inherent human rights. Even enumerated rights. And they go to great lengths justifying their contortions.

Where you going with this T-Bolt?

Relax, there is gun content.

Security Theater at the TSA is an effort to simulate safety. But it is psychological safety. What would happen if I, or most everyone (both of you) reading this blog carried a gun in a holster on every airplane trip? Chances are, nothing. No one would be less safe. If LOTS of people do this there might be a negligent discharge every now and then. Most of those wouldn’t even hurt anyone. There would still be a bigger risk from food poisoning on the plane. Or a car accident getting to the airport. People on the plane with evil intent would have to deal with law-abiding people able to defend themselves so they’d have to change their tactics. But screening for guns was done BEFORE the TSA was put in place. The Security Theater all travelers have to endure is not about guns. It’s about making people FEEL like the hijacks that happened on 9/11 can’t happen again. At this, the Security Theater fails in reality to impact future outcomes. Unarmed passengers wouldn’t sit by idly while a handful of men with box cutters take over a plane. The bad guys would know this and have to change tactics on 9/12, already. People KNEW on 9/12 that they couldn’t just relinquish responsibility for their safety and let the authorities handle it. Terrorists would have to go back to bombs or somesuch to cause grave mischief on a plane, but they weren’t going to be able to fly planes into buildings while passengers just cowed in the back of the plane.

But the TSA security theater has plenty of holes that evil-doers can exploit. The traveling public just chooses to ignore those holes. The public accepts the fantasy. But it’s at great cost in tax money.

The same applies to open carry. People, in general, want to ‘feel’ safe. To them, guns aren’t. These hoplophobes have less reservations when people are vetted by government entities and carry concealed. Once conceal-carry is enacted and no predicted Dodge City type events occur, and the guns are still out of sight, they are out of mind. But to SEE a gun, and the reminders of risk and responsibilities that other people, all people, even THEM, have, their bubble is popped. They’d rather stay in their little bubblewrapped fantasy world.

I keep thinking that the most effective anti-gun tactic the Brady Campaign could enact would be to allow for more sketchy people to conceal carry. They need the unstable and criminals to get permits. Then, when these people commit any acts of atrocity, they can point to the lack of safety. Even if an individual murders someone with a baseball bat, the news story will still say, “man with CCW murders so-and-so.” From this angle they wouldn’t just chip away CCW laws. They’d have to push for a total repeal, nation wide.

It would have to be separate operation, apart from the Brady’s, to push for such arming of the irresponsible. And it’s a very cynical and diabolical tactic that may backfire on them. They “pro-criminal, pro-violent, pro-insane CCW” group would have to push their agenda by something like “You are just discriminating against those people, and discrimination is bad! You are a racist for opposing us!” But it would be a disaster for pro RKBA people (right to keep and bear arms.)

The other side of the coin is we, in the RKBA community, are put in a spot where we have to hide our guns to keep from scaring the vast majority of voters that just want their fantasy safety bubble to stay intact. If you don’t scare the sheep, the sheep don’t vote against you. They don’t vote against you if they see some benefit to maintaining their safety fantasy. Then a person stops a crime with a gun, and word gets out in the press of guns being used in such a positive light, and even BETTER that on one is hurt and the criminal is jailed for a long time, that helps them stay in their bubble and bolsters our cause.

We pro-gun types have a large segment that have their own fantasy safety bubble. These types think of the gun as a safety talisman as much as the other side thinks of the gun as a automatic risk-inducing talisman. We have to guard against this.

So all this means what, T-Bolt? What do we do from here?

We keep hammering that people are RESPONSIBLE. That risk is there and can’t be legislated away. That we need to be careful with open carry and not push too far too soon or risk turning the majority against us. If we DO take the responsibility for being armed, in the home, or on your person, we have to train and train to minimize mistakes. And the most important part of the training is working on mindset (see Cooper) and the vigilance that goes along with it to minimize improper incidents and circumstances.