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.
Ignatius's picture

I struggle with this; your view has merit in the current environment.  There were some local issues that got me into the booth.

Citxmech's picture

I agree.  The further you get from the top, the more influence we have.  Politics on a local level is where we can make the biggest difference.

UGrev's picture

You can either view it as compiance, or you can view it as a warning. I chose the latter. 

fonzannoon's picture

How do we prevent the coming Idiocracy from becoming a total reality? How do you prevent stupid people from procreating? That is what I want to know.

Ralph Spoilsport's picture

This is a real problem. I can't think of anything that wouldn't smack of Eugenics. The problem at the other end of the scale is the efficiency the psychopaths at the top have shown at getting their DNA into the gene pool.'s picture


How do you prevent stupid people from procreating?


Just stop subsidizing it. That would be a good start.

Sockeye's picture

End the Fed. It enables people to become stupid and irresponsible. Take away the government cheese (in all it's forms) and you'll see people wise up real quick.

blunderdog's picture

Well, it's a tough issue, since we have to make sure they can't get abortions or learn about birth-control in schools or even GET birth control if they're poor.

Otherwise, though, where would we get all the stupid people to continue to campaign for big-gummit oversight of those sorts of things?

stinkhammer's picture

FREEDOM!  bring it motherfuckers

r101958's picture

Spot on Ron - as usual. A voice of clarity and reason from the fog of MSM and government obfuscation.

fuu's picture



gckings19's picture

ron paul for president.  its funny, the guy that the media prtrayed as a right wing nut, is actually a man of reasoned thought.  what a joke the media is....and the political establishment.

sun tzu's picture

the lame stream media is comprised of groupthink monkeys

Creepy Lurker's picture

This is a powerful essay. If he continues to write like this, (and can get the essays disbributed widely) this could end up being more effective than running for POTUS in rigged elections.

Modern Tom Paine, bitchez?

Poetic injustice's picture

Safety for selected, slavery for rest.

not fat not stupid's picture

<to rebuilding civil society in America, meaning a society based on family, religion, civic and social institutions>


easy to say but WHOSE family, WHOSE religion WHOSE social institutions? fuck family values, fuck religion and fuck institutions that want to send us back to 1950.

Turin Turambar's picture

In a free society, people voluntarily choose for themselves ABSENT government coercion.

StandardDeviant's picture

Exactly.  What a shame that he dragged religion into this.  (Oh, and abortion: WTF?!)

andyupnorth's picture

I agree with all the arguments, but I still have a feeling that the Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax; a false flag...'s picture

Didn't watch the video but Sandy Hook as a false flag goes both too far and not far enough. The "conspiracy" is much broader than that. It includes a variety of efforts to dumb down individuals and make them dependent through politics, media and pharmaceuticals. No one had to select Adam Lanza as a patsy. The system is designed to destroy the individual's humanity and create a a nation of helpless people, some of whom lash out violently while the majority refuse to take any independent steps in protecting or even educating themselves.

andyupnorth's picture

Watch the videos Crockett.  It's not undeniable proof, but it's certainly suspiscious.'s picture

I watched half of it and I'd like to have those seven minutes back. Is it any surprise that when media rushes to judgement that there are errors not only in their conclusions but in the individual reported "facts" as well? Please don't fall for the idea that every bad thing you can imagine is true.

The problem here is the "Gun Free Zones" law and the fact that crazy killers look for just that kind of soft target. Making the story into something else only helps the gun grabbers.

A Nanny Moose's picture

Part Hanlon's Razor, part government educated parrots, regurgitating The State's narrative.

andyupnorth's picture

Then there's the man who claims to have sheltered students from Ms. Soto's class:

How were  the  kids able to leave a school that's in lockdown?  And it's also a little suspiscious how they were lined up in front of his driveway... as if they were planted there...

andyupnorth's picture

And wasn't there a sophisticated video surveillance system in the school?  Where's the footage?  Or was it confiscated like the Pentagon footage on 9/11?

DosZap's picture

I agree with all the arguments, but I still have a feeling that the Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax; a false flag...



Sure, just like the rest.

They will not allow the simple answers to the easily solved MASS murders to be implemented.

Allow armed guards/CCP well trained teachers, and CCP holders access to any VENUE they want,then this shit would come to a 98% screeching halt.

BUT, the NRA's suggestions, are falling of deaf ears, their agenda to rob us of more liberties, could not be accomplished if WE did sensible/logical things.

If the POTUS and state/local gvts actually gave a rats ass about the Innoncents, make the perps PAY.

After all,"Never let a good crisis go to waste".

Nothing makes me more ill, than seeing 50-75 SWAT/LE/PD/Sherriff Depts AFTER the frigging facts, doing NOTHING except body counts.

blunderdog's picture

There were armed guards at the Columbine shooting, they failed to save the day.  I think it seems like a fine idea, myself, but someone has to pay for it, and there's always a second risk that comes into play when you have folks with guns around other people's kids.

If an excitable trained expert ends up shooting someone "innocent" because he mistook a toy for a gun or something, it wouldn't go over very well.  Perhaps we can shift the statistics a bit--rather than 10 kids per year on average being shot by crazed gunmen, we could turn it into 10 kids per year shot accidentally by overzealous "defenders of liberty."

Best just to suck it in and cope, either way.'s picture

Armed citizens did prevent additional killings in Pearl, Mississippi, Edinboro, PA and Happy Valley, Oregon. No innocent bystanders were hurt by those who interceded. In Oregon the citizen with a concealed weapons permit did not fire because a bystander was in the way. The crazed shooter then went into a store and killed himself. As far as costs go, the NRA has presented a plan that will cost schools little to nothing to implement.


Every school and community is different, but this model security plan
will allow every school to choose among its various components to
develop a school safety strategy that fits their own unique situation,
whether it's a large urban school, a small rural school or anything
in between.

Armed, trained, qualified school security personnel will be one element
of that plan, but by no means the only element. If a school decides for
whatever reason that it doesn't want or need armed security
personnel, that of course is a decision to be made by parents at the
local level.

The second point I want to make is that this will be a program that
doesn't depend on massive funding from local authorities or the
federal government. Instead, it'll make use of local volunteers serving
in their own communities.

In my home state of Arkansas, my son was a volunteer with a local
group called "Watchdog Dads," who volunteer their time at schools to
patrol playgrounds and provide a measure of added security.



nmewn's picture

I can inform you that there are armed teachers in our school here and it costs no one anything extra. Its their safety as well, they take it seriously and they don't leave their rights at the school door (or five hundred feet away).

When laws are deemed stupid by the population they are routinely ones been shot, including a disruptive (at times) squire nmewn.

He gets that from his mother ;-)'s picture

The LIBOR connection originated with "Fabian4Liberty" who provides no evidence whatsoever. It's bullshit.



Ralph Spoilsport's picture

These words from RP, uttered in the face of the worst media onslaught in recent memory, were sorely needed. I feel a bit better now.

"Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices. - Voltaire

Reformed Sheep's picture

Real change can happen only when we commit ourselves to rebuilding civil society in America...

And therein lies the problem - at this point, just how do you return America to a civil society?

Those in power (and their media lackeys) won't let it happen - not enough profit in a purely 'civil' society...

Ralph Spoilsport's picture

Hang in there for a while longer. This isn't over yet.


Once you go welfare you can never go back Ralpie. As a whole, the NA populous will never return to it's previous virtuous cycle. It cannot.

sessinpo's picture

You have it right. If I have the time, I would elaborate further. Very few think critically and see this. Up arrow for you.

I have to say it verbally because for some reason, I clicking the green arrow isn't working.

Ralph Spoilsport's picture

If you start a post with Italics, the arrows don't work.

Citxmech's picture

Good catch!  I was wondering about that. . .

Money 4 Nothing's picture

Revolution, and return the Republic back to her rightful owners, the American people. What don't they get about by the people for the people?

Sockeye's picture

How do we rebuild a civil society? We can start by recognizing the tyranny of an unjust government.

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

mess nonster's picture

I voted for Ron Paul. It was easy. I simply used an indelible marker to write "Ron Paul" in big black letters on the screen of the electronic automatic vote-generation machine.

Then, aftfer a moment's reflection, I wrote beneath that, "If you vote for anyone else, you deserve the police state you are going to get, you stupid brainwashed motherf**kers."

It was the best voting experience of my life.

TrustWho's picture

Here Here! Such common sense logic from a person who lived and worked many years in Washington DC on this Christmas Eve day is just refreshing.

TrustWho's picture

Patrick Henry of Virginia stated so well......."Give Me LIBERTY or Give Me DEATH"

Is life so damn precious that being a slave is ok? Where is the spirit that sent men west where many men, women and children died on the trails so they could have a moment of sweat, blood and toil as a FREE Man!


.gov is making everybody safe, no?


SWAT Cops To Ask For IDs From Everyone In This Town

“This fear is what’s given us the reason to do this. Once I have stats and people saying they’re scared, we can do this,”Stovall said, according to the Paragould Daily Press. “It allows us to do what we’re fixing to do.”

“If you’re out walking, we’re going to stop you, ask why you’re out walking, check for your ID,”

“To ask you for your ID, I have to have a reason,” he said. “Well, I’ve got statistical reasons that say I’ve got a lot of crime right now, which gives me probable cause to ask what you’re doing out. Then when I add that people are scared…then that gives us even more [reason] to ask why are you here and what are you doing in this area.”

“They may not be doing anything but walking their dog,” added Mayor Gaskill, “but they’re going to have to prove it.”

Show me your papers Bitchez!'s picture

The people in that town should all go out for a stroll and not only provide ID but have a long, pleasant chat with every officer encountered. Bog down the system. This is what Jesus meant when he said "go the extra mile." The Romans made peasants carry packs for the legions but they could only be forced to go one mile. Jesus said go the extra mile so as to confuse the Romans and liberate the people by breaking the law through over compliance. It's a stroke of genius.


But we have a constitution my friend that defines these critical boundries. Why do so many have no regard for the very basis of their everyday lives?

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges ... of citizens ... nor ... deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny ... the equal protection of the laws.

Learn it, live it. Your god has nothing to do with it. Please.


The Fourth Amendment guards against searches, arrests, and seizures of property without a specific warrant or a "probable cause" to believe a crime has been committed. Some rights to privacy have been found in this amendment and others by the Supreme Court.'s picture

The courts aren't going to protect us. Bogging down the system provides every individual with a way to compromise the false authority of an overzealous government.