Ron Paul: Government Security Is Just Another Kind Of Violence

Tyler Durden's picture

From Ron Paul

Government Security Is Just Another Kind Of Violence

The senseless and horrific killings last week in Newtown, Connecticut reminded us that a determined individual or group of individuals can cause great harm no matter what laws are in place.  Connecticut already has restrictive gun laws relative to other states, including restrictions on fully automatic, so-called “assault” rifles and gun-free zones. 

Predictably, the political left responded to the tragedy with emotional calls for increased gun control.  This is understandable, but misguided. The impulse to have government “do something” to protect us in the wake national tragedies is reflexive and often well intentioned.  Many Americans believe that if we simply pass the right laws, future horrors like the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting can be prevented.  But this impulse ignores the self evident truth that criminals don't obey laws.   

The political right, unfortunately, has fallen into the same trap in its calls for quick legislative solutions to gun violence.  If only we put armed police or armed teachers in schools, we’re told, would-be school shooters will be dissuaded or stopped. 

While I certainly agree that more guns equals less crime and that private gun ownership prevents many shootings, I don’t agree that conservatives and libertarians should view government legislation, especially at the federal level, as the solution to violence.  Real change can happen only when we commit ourselves to rebuilding civil society in America, meaning a society based on family, religion, civic and social institutions, and peaceful cooperation through markets.  We cannot reverse decades of moral and intellectual decline by snapping our fingers and passing laws. 

Let’s not forget that our own government policies often undermine civil society, cheapen life, and encourage immorality.  The president and other government officials denounce school violence, yet still advocate for endless undeclared wars abroad and easy abortion at home.  U.S. drone strikes kill thousands, but nobody in America holds vigils or devotes much news coverage to those victims, many of which are children, albeit, of a different color.

Obviously I don’t want to conflate complex issues of foreign policy and war with the Sandy Hook shooting, but it is important to make the broader point that our federal government has zero moral authority to legislate against violence.

Furthermore, do we really want to live in a world of police checkpoints, surveillance cameras, metal detectors, X-ray scanners, and warrantless physical searches?  We see this culture in our airports: witness the shabby spectacle of once proud, happy Americans shuffling through long lines while uniformed TSA agents bark orders.  This is the world of government provided "security," a world far too many Americans now seem to accept or even endorse.  School shootings, no matter how horrific, do not justify creating an Orwellian surveillance state in America.

Do we really believe government can provide total security?  Do we want to involuntarily commit every disaffected, disturbed, or alienated person who fantasizes about violence?  Or can we accept that liberty is more important than the illusion of state-provided security? Government cannot create a world without risks, nor would we really wish to live in such a fictional place.  Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives.  We shouldn’t settle for substituting one type of violence for another. Government role is to protect liberty, not to pursue unobtainable safety.

Our freedoms as Americans preceded gun control laws, the TSA, or the Department of Homeland Security.  Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens to live without government interference, not by safety. It is easy to clamor for government security when terrible things happen; but liberty is given true meaning when we support it without exception, and we will be safer for it.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
NoDebt's picture

I'm with ya, Ron.  It's just not in fashion right now.  Only circumstances will change things at this point, as I think you found out in DC.

They're on a power trip in DC right now that makes heroin look like Pixie Stix.

Zer0head's picture

safety has supplaneted liberty from the assholes on CNN who end every disaster broadcast with the words "stay safe" to the retarded reporter standing in the middle of a hurricane to the skin and bones soccer moms who ferry their precious to the school a block and a half away or the assholes who pronounce that they have no problem CCTV if it can save just one life

we are a society of safety over liberty

stay safe emeffers stay safe

but build a house out of telephone poles in the mojave desert without a building permit and your going to jail cause the house might not be safe

"County code enforcement officers argued that the creation wasn't structurally sound and was a fire and earthquake risk",0,59281...

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

The following is the true reason for his sentence.

"Prosecutors argued that Fahey showed a deliberate disregard for authority and had no one but himself to blame for his fate."

God dammed upity slaves.


MillionDollarBonus_'s picture

While ZHers obsess over ‘liberty’ and ‘freedom of speech’, terrorists are planning to destroy America and cause untold destruction. Why don’t you idiots try living in the real world for a change, instead of this no-government, no-federal-reserve fantasy land where there is no terroriststic or criminalistic activity, no thieves and no corruption. Sorry idiots, but the only way to protect us from dangers like this is to give more power to politicians and let them work on a solution. If any of you morons has a better solution, I’d love to hear it.

LynRobison's picture

Where are you going to find these angelic politicians who are not criminals themselves?

In your utopian world, who watches the watchers?

Dr Benway's picture

When libertards claim there would be less random gun violence if there were guns everywhere, they prove their complete disregard for reason and common sense. Therefore, I need not use arguments here. Instead, let me just say fuck you, you fucking morons. Fuck you forever. Fuck you and fuck off.

UGrev's picture

Clearly you do not understand the concept of "Easy Prey/Target".  The fact that there are over 90million gun owners and of that segment, there are millions who carry concealed proves you WRONG!

Furthermore, there is no wild west as you would like to believe would happen. Oh yes.. you want to believe that because you're a fucking idiot to the highest degree. You can't fathom how people would actually restrain themselves because somehow, owningn a weapon means you're going to use it at every chance you can irrationally determine to use it.  No sir, there is no wild west like you suggest (implicitly). 

Kindly pull your head out of your fucking ass and get with the GD program. You're fucking it up for the rest of us. Figure it out or GFTO. 

Dr Benway's picture

The US has murder and incarceration rates of a third world nation. And it's because of... too few handguns there. OK.

A Lunatic's picture

What has the incarceration rate got to do with private gun ownership? The gun/knife free UK is the crime capitol of the world hands down, The U.S. doesn't even make it into the top ten. Do your homework.

Dr Benway's picture

No connection between handgun prevalence and murder rates? Haha you are all fucking mentally disabled.

And UK having more homicides than the US? Haha you are mongo

A Lunatic's picture

The facts are out there, and seeing that you have internet capability I'm certain you could do your own research and become acquainted with them. It seems however that you are hopelessly agenda driven, which I find to be sad when you are virtually drowning in a sea of intelligence........

AldousHuxley's picture

government's role is not to protect liberty, but to protect property. They don't give a shit about your liberty. but if your house asset value belongs in a portfolio held by the elite, then yes they care.


Also, government has multiple roles, but the question today is how much does it cost for those services which government has monopoly of?

Citxmech's picture

Oh come on guys, don't you want to trade those old quaint rags, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights (as well as the Magna Carta) for the safety of a womb-like police state where nothing bad ever happens?

Note the wise sentiments of the esteemed Fareed Zakaria who recently pointed to China as a beacon of national safety where school children are merely slashed with knives - isn't living under a system like China's (or by extension, N. Korea's) worth the inconvenience to feel as safe as their citizenry?  <just writing that makes me want to puke, btw>

Listening to all these neutered pussies clamoring to turn in their hard-won rights like those deluded souls who would sell their guns in a government promoted buy-back campaign also makes me sick.

Turn in you guns if you want, but don't try to deny me my inalienable right to defend myself from any who would attempt to deny me any of those rights by force.




AldousHuxley's picture

bill of rights don't mean a thing when you don't have money in a capitalistic system.





hapless's picture

Exactly.  Bill of rights just gets in the way of taking other people's stuff from them.  Next thing you know people will be expected to work.

redpill's picture

There are 100,000 public schools in the United States.

If just 1 out of 5 men aged 20-70 years old volunteered to spend ONE SINGLE DAY PER YEAR guarding their local public school with their own firearm we would have armed protection for our children for the entire school year without a need for a single government thug.  Hell we could make it 2 out of every 5 men, they can guard each other too to ensure no funny business.  And I'm sure there would be plenty of women interested in participating in the program as well.

Point being is that we have more than enough people and resources to protect our children from this type of violence if government would get out of the way and allow the citizenry to protect itself.

Say what you want about George Zimmerman, I wish he was there that day at Sandy Hook Elementary.

silverserfer's picture

One better is to have trained faculty be armed. forget volunteers. Teaching jobs are at a premium and a couple of classes in law enforcement/crime prevention, concealed weapon permitas part of the ciriculum when a person gets a teaching degree would be a FUCK LOT better idea then to hire a FUCKING COP to guard a school at $60K a year as proposed by the fucktard NRA union.   

prains's picture

400 americans own more wealth than 150,000,000 hard working, law abiding, honest american people> This is a FACT that can't be disputed. You are being duped into thinking otherwise and need to WAKE UP !!

This is all about control of YOUR wealth. None of these 400 have earned this right IT HAS BEEN STOLEN FROM YOU by crony oligarchian corptocracies that have bought your GOV'T. WAKE UP before it's too late.





derek_vineyard's picture

want my guns?

........('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
..........''...\.......... _.·´


Fizzywig's picture

Oh noes! Someone shot the tip of your finger off.

LiquidBrick's picture

Why should they volunteer? Who will pay for their gas on the way to the school? Who will pay for their car insurance? Or Lunch? Or Insurance in case they get shot?

See? Volunteering is big-business. There is no such thing as a free ride anymore.



LiquidBrick's picture

Why should they volunteer? Who will pay for their gas on the way to the school? Who will pay for their car insurance? Or Lunch? Or Insurance in case they get shot?

See? Volunteering is big-business. There is no such thing as a free ride anymore.



TrulyBelieving's picture

The "Bill of Rights" applies to all men equally. And when it doesn't it more closely resembles the socialist, fascist system that you, AldousHuxley, believe in.

EnslavethechildrenforBen's picture

We the Bankers, by the Bankers, for the Bankers, in order to form a more perfect method of stealing, murdering and enslaving...

Zer0head's picture

large pdf open at your own risk


lots of killing going on but to simplistically draw a correlation between gun ownership and homicide rate ignores issues including demographics, economics, urbanization, gang activity, drugs etc. not to mention quality and nature of the data and reporting.


Of interest of the nearly half million homicides per year globally the UNDOC (and they are NWO slime) estimate that 58% are committed with guns.

Sorry got that wrong actually this UN agency says that of the nearly half million homicides per year only 42% involve guns.  hmmmm

edb5s's picture

I'd advise you to check the prevalence of gun ownership in Switzerland and compare it to their murder rate.

Urban Redneck's picture

The problem in Switzerland isn't even the lawfully owned firearms, there are less than 20 murders per year involving a firearm (in a population significantly less than metro Chicago) a significant number of those are traced to the illegal guns that the damn wetbacks smuggle in from the EUSSR.

The anti-gun nuts here went on a crusade against Swiss suicide by firearm in the last referendum (which is ironic given that assisted suicide is somewhat legal- to the point there is concern to avoid Switzerland becoming a destination for that sort of medical tourism).

In 2001, in the massacre at the Cantonal parliament in Zug- 14 people were murdered (which single handedly screwed the statistics for that year), but there was no major gun law passed as a result, the 2010 law actually had a lot to do with the Schengen Treaty and harmonization of laws with the EUSSR Nazis...

conspicio's picture

Switzerland, ahh yes, funny you mention Switzerland. The funny thing about Switzerland is the vast homogeneity of their culture. There is no Kwanzaa bullshit there, no bloods and crips, no Compton hoods of endless bloodshed, glorification of subversive cultures of death and destruction via rapping, and territorial drug wars. No, there is nothing there but the lilly whiteness of hundreds of years of neutral survival and shared utopian vision for their future.

In short, the Swiss don't put up with any ungrateful minority populace usurping their daily practice of governance, finance, and culture. So yes, there is Switzerland, but when someone actually gives a fuck about what level of civil insurgency they tolerate in their country, then you get the Swiss result. Unlike the Swiss, assimilation is no longer forced in the US, it is a free-for all of cultural confusion. The Swiss will have none of this bullshit.


DRT RD's picture

I don't have an econ Phd., but I do known that correlation doesn't equal causation. 

TWSceptic's picture

In Belgium we have strict gun laws. This is the result: Now victims can be killed more slowly with knifes instead. What's more important though, there is much more crime per capita.


Did you know that the US actually has less crime and violence per capita than a majority of other developed nations? Of course you didn't, the MSM doesn't like that information...


Probably an educational video for you:

AnAnonymous's picture

The US is also a less densely populated area.

For some, it only takes a few steps to get a killing. For some others, it takes a car drive.

TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

For Chinese citizenism citizens, it takes blobbing up into Tibet.

AnAnonymous's picture

More fractional reserve by this 'american'.

Fractional reserve is 'american' nature.

One eye for one eye, they used to say.

With 'americans', it has turned into

ten eyes for one eye.

Bankers are just 'americans' who happen to be bankers.

Tibet is being used to explain every endeavour by 'americans', GB, Iraq, Libya, the school shooting etc

TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

More fictional reserve by this Chinese citizenism 'AnAnonymican'.

Fictional reserve is Chinese citizenism propagandation eternal nature.

With Chinese citizenism citizens, 'americans' are a convenient exterior to push blame off onto. The incapacity of Chinese citizenism citizens for self indiction is infamous.

 'Americanism' is being used to explain every endeavour by Chinese citizenism citizens, poisoned rivers, polluted air, Tibetan self immolations, desertification etc

AldousHuxley's picture

guns dont' kill people idiots do, so let's get rid of all idiots



margaris's picture

A Sociopath combined with

Psychiatric medication

--->    Killer in the making.

mbarido's picture

PLUS +1,000,000 (Million)

jerry_theking_lawler's picture

if you got rid of all the idiots...then we would only have a 1 party system....

The Navigator's picture

hmmm........ maybe we'd have a no party system

silverserfer's picture

your older dumpster baby sister would disaprove of your comments ananoymous if she were alive today.

Calmyourself's picture

Actually hang out in your local square long enough a T-72 will run you over.

Ookspay's picture

No guns used, huh...

My favorite is Julio, he just wanted to kill himself and his girlfriend. Not being able to get a gun he used a gallon of gasoline and torched the nightclub where she worked, 87 dead, Julio lived.


nmewn's picture

Yep...clearly gasolines fault ;-)

DaveyJones's picture

clearly, ethanol would have reduced the fatalities.

Merry Christmas Nmewn

nmewn's picture

lol...and a Merry Christmas to you and yours Davey...and have a safe & Happy New Year!

redpill's picture

I've said it before, go ahead and ban guns, just wait until these psychotic geniuses start getting creative...I won't even list the possibilities, I think your imagination will suffice.


nmewn's picture

I'm just amazed how "some people" just roll over to all the MSM hype, on nothing but pure emotional adrenaline alone.

Gary Kleck (criminologist FSU) destroyed the "progressive" meme of a bad gun on a societal cost benefit analysis long ago...back in the 90's I think.

Guns are used far more (to protect life & property) than they are used to take life or orders of magnitude, it's not even close.

But of course, we don't hear about Granny capping the two burglars coming through her window in the middle of the night in the national media. We hear about a thug Kansas City football player kiling his wife/girlfriend, then killing himself via Bob fucking Costas.

And so it goes.