Darth Wong wrote:Frankly, it's a lousy idea to encourage massive weapons proliferation here. What you want is better-armed police, not a populace armed to the teeth with heavy weapons.
Look at Africa: every time large shipments of arms go in, there's a spike in tribal violence and civil wars. Or Mexico, where more than 80% of their criminal gang weapons come from the US. You dump shitloads of weapons into an area, and violence follows. The fact is that demon/angel incursions are few in number, whereas the potential consequences of a large-scale individual arms buildup are much more severe and widespread.
I beg to differ, but I expect that's because you and I see life somewhat differently.
I believe the solution to warlords is even more guns - a heavily armed society is a polite and respectful society.
With
one important note:
That society has to go through a period where the stupid, the blindly criminal, and those who are simply rude yet fearless die at the hands of their neighbors.
This has happened several times in history, most notably in the former Kingdom of Montenegro. (long story, if you're interested, I'll recount it later.)
In the novel "
Lifter" (1986), author Crawford Kilian once noted through one of his characters that ANYTHING worthwhile must be paid for in blood. The US highway system takes anywhere from twenty to fifty thousand lives a year, depending on the year in question, yet we're unwilling to make it safer, because that safety would cost large amounts of cash. The 50,000 dead a year is actually cheaper.
50,000 dead,
cheaper? - that sounds cold. But divide by 50 states, that's only 1,000 dead per state. Divide by 365, and that's only 2.74 people per day per state. The average American thinks - when they do think about it - that these are acceptable odds, and MUCH better than having to put up with higher taxes.
So we vote down safety-related tax increases, and prefer to take our risks. After all, less than 3 people a day? Can't POSSIBLY happen to me, it ALWAYS happens to the other guy! No more taxes to pay to keep the other guy safe, dammit!
(Remember, that's why America came in to being - tax protests!)
This did happen in the old west, you know. Despite what Hollywood would have you believe, it was a rather peaceful place, discounting the Indian wars and the occasional range war. Being rude and impolite in an old western town had the odd effect of having the entire town draw on you, rather like that famous scene at the end of the Blues Brothers, set in the tax office.
A warlord might think he's the baddest thing on two feet - until a few hundred annoyed citizens draw on him and show him, just with the look in their eyes, that they're no more bothered by killing him than they are bothered by stepping on a bug.
The warlord in Africa situation? In my opinion, and mine only, it's caused -
in part! - by the victims being unable (no guns of their own) and unwilling (afraid for their lives) to fight back.
Would they fight back if they WERE armed? I don't know. Some people ARE natural sheep, they won't fight back even when you're slitting their throats with a knife. And I honestly don't know what to do about that. (Aside from finding a way of testing for the condition, then somehow making it both politically, financially and socially possible to put such people in a nice safe home somewhere, where they can still lead happy, productive lives. And I don't ever expect
that to happen short of a total war and complete restructuring of society.)
Myself, I'm more like a porcupine. Heavily armed, but I won't fire the first shot. You're safe from me if you leave me alone. That's my philosophy. And I believe the human race could use a lot more porcupines and a lot fewer sheep and wolves. But
that's just my opinion. And I've had bad opinions before. *shrug*
There IS a way around it, but you've already said you dislike it. Thunderdome style. Dump a shitload of weapons on a population, and
eventually the extremely warlike (wolves) and the extremely pacifistic (sheep) will all die or be killed, leaving you with a population that's heavily armed, polite, respectful, and very dangerous (the porcupines).
It'll simply cost you in a lot of innocent blood.
But then again, everything worthwhile does.
Which just goes to show that life is seriously unfair.
As for better armed police? Show me a man who trusts his local police force, and I'll show you someone P. T. Barnum would take for every dollar they had. Sure, there are many people who've become police officers because they had high-minded ideals when they first signed up. With time, they become jaded, or corrupt, or keep their ideals - which is just another term for "Wow, he's a nutter, isn't he?" (Who was it that said that if you weren't idealistic as a youth, you had no heart, and if you weren't heartless in old age, you had no brains?) So you have to choose between officers who are cynical and jaded, or cynical and corrupt, or who are so attached to their idealism, they're dangerously detached from the real world.
Incidentally, that's why volunteer firemen make me uneasy - risking their lives every day against an uncaring, uncompromising enemy that will NEVER go away, for a pittance? I deeply admire their courage, and worry about their obsession. Me, I'd have my hand out in front of the home owner, demanding triple-extra-double-overtime pay, or I'll just spray water on the fire from the nice safe OUTSIDE, far away from the flames, thank you very much...
Ed.
(an anarcho-libertarian of the L. Neil Smith school, but you've probably already guessed that, no?)
Angels with inspiration, imagination and information about us sounds like a recipe for superweapons and megadeath. If we're lucky, Michael or somebody similar will just try to engineer a coup or something that will hinder Heaven's efforts against us.
