The Question of “Need”

Cargosquid pointed out a very apt quote from Joan Peterson that fits well with this story from this weekend.

” A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

I don’t see the word “need” here.

Go read the whole screed if you had any doubt she was reality-challenged person.

Of course there’s nothing in there about “need”, there is no “need” clause on any human right. Hell if there WAS a “Need” clause the 4th Amendment would be null and void, as the only people who NEED to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures are criminals, and we don’t really want to be protecting them, do we?

The list goes on. The Sir Edmund Hillary defense of “Because it was there” seems to be good enough reason to exercise ANY rights enumerated there, and that INCLUDES keeping AND BEARING arms.

That being said, the “Need” argument in itself is pretty lame as well. “Need” can be a pretty strange thing. I’m right now sitting in my armory typing this on my computer. At this point I NEED the computer, and high-speed internet to write this post. Of course I do this post for my amusement as well as yours, do we need to be entertained?

Still we like to draw lines at life and death. I need food and water, and clothing to protect me from exposure. But what about incidental needs? A house in my old neighborhood in Maine burned on either Thanksgiving or black Friday. My mother and I walked by and we saw a young girl showing somebody one of her possessions that was burned beyond recognition and a woman that was probably her mother sobbing in somebody’s arms. Those people will need housing, and certainly if something could have prevented the fire I suspect they will say they needed that. Looks like it may have been a kitchen fire by the damage to the structure, don’t know all the details, but I do know the house was severely damaged, and the fire department was about a mile from them. I don’t NEED my fire extinguisher right now, and those people don’t need one right now, but while their house was burning those are very nice things to have.

Another example I like to use are safety belts in cars. I’ve been in a few minor accidents and one major one…never did my safety-belt protect me from any serious injury. And certainly as I was running errands around town today, nor on my drive home from Maine did I at ALL NEED my safety belt…still I think we can rightfully call me a fool if I had elected NOT to use it.

Now how about with guns? Thankfully I’ve never NEEDED a gun, but there have been several cases where I was glad to have one, and other times when I was disarmed where I wished I DID have one. Another one of those events happened this weekend.

My Mother and I were walking along the ocean and we saw a seal swimming in the harbor. We had just turned a corner when I saw a young man who just tripped my alarm bells. He was dressed a bit strange, and disheveled, but honestly I couldn’t tell you exactly what about him gave me the creeps but it did. He turned down towards where we were. Also happened this place had a good view of the harbor so we ducked over to the corner so watch for the seal…and I also wanted to let this guy pass us so he’d be in sight rather than in my blind spot.

As he passed he started babbling about being bi-polar and apologizing for all the graffiti in the area. Mom looked scared, I just kept my eye on him.

Once he’d moved along a good bit Mom started discussing how to avoid him. I pointed out this was why I carried a gun. We followed him at a safe distance until he turned one way, and we went the other.

Nope, didn’t NEED my gun, but was glad to have it. And certainly if I NEEDED a gun, but didn’t have one my Mother and I could have been dead or injured.

Just about everybody doesn’t NEED a gun…but for those who do, if they don’t have one in their time of need they regret it for the rest of their life, which often isn’t very long.

As a wise friend of mine says: “Carry your gun, its a lighter burden than regret”.

I’ll stick with that philosophy.

This entry was posted in Freedom, Guns, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to The Question of “Need”

  1. Erin Palette says:

    I don’t see the word “need” here.

    Then she doesn’t know the language she speaks. Not only is the adjective form of “necessary” defined as “required; requisite” aka “needed”, but the word “necessary” itself is derived from the Latin word “necesse” which means “unavoidable, inevitable, or indispensable”.

    Now I suppose she will argue that a “necessary militia” does not equate to “the right of the people to KBA”, but from a purely semantic standpoint, the word “need” is built right into the phrase. After that it’s a simple matter of grammar and causal statements.

  2. Archer says:

    Darn, Erin beat me to it. “Necessary” = “Needed”

    Except that she doesn’t care about the security of a free state. Just the security of an elitist, controlling, Nanny state.

    At least she remembered “the people,” unlike her colleague Dennis Hennigan.

  3. Jake says:

    Well, since the text specifically declares that it is a Right, then “need” is completely irrelevant, whatever people like Joan may think.

    But, yeah, “necessary = need”. In fact, it basically says “To keep this a free country, we need the people to be able to keep and bear arms as they see fit.”

    • Weerd Beard says:

      Isn’t it astonishing that we can shred these arguments with such ease, and with so many different angles of attack and they still keep making them.

      And this of course is the REAL reason why Joan moderates her own comments. Death threats and foul language are sexy when you cherish victim-hood, but honestly she hates the truth and can’t stand to read it on her website.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *