: State socialists, right, left and centre, would naturally oppose the right of individuals to defend themselves, and specifically to own any means to do so, namely guns. Defend who from whom? Remember, the US constitution does not actually garauntee teh right to own weapons, it garauntees the right to join a local militia to protect the community from oppression. A thing some folks tend to forget, I'd go quote the *full* article, but can't be bothered...
: Stateless Socialists, if I understand what is being said, must therefore support the right to self defence. If this right is to mean anything, an individual must also have the right to own and use the means to self defence, namely a gun.
Some Socialists have a long history of wanting to Arm the working class, but thats usually only a stop gap measure for recolution. Personally, I think its pointless.
: We should premise any arguments with the knowledge that guns cannot be actually banned, that any kind of prohibition fails and infact just produces criminalised black markets.
Only under a profit driven system, i would posit that under socialism we'd decide that manufacturing guns and weapons is a gargantuan waste of resources, and would stop making them, making their ownership or not a non issue, no bugger has guns.
:That the only people who would be unable to access guns following a ban would be people unwilling to break the law. Hence gun control is more correctly termed victim disarmament.
Well, since there would be no law under socialism...however, further from that, our aim should be to create a society which eliminates most forms of crime (and I think socialism would do that) leaving only crimes of passion, social personal grievences, and pretty much anything can be turned into a weapon (I am a member of the campiagn against Snoooker-Balls in Socks).
Basically, I think there will be no need for Guns, at all. I'd be glad to see the back of them- their defensive value is largely illusory anyhow...
: Well? If you believe that stateless socialism is the way to go then do you agree with my contention, that you will find poeple having access to the means to self defence perfectly resonent with such socialism?
: If you disagree with stateless socialism then I already understand why you disagree with poeple having access to the means to self defence and we can link to the thousands of online arguments of both 'sides' ad nauseum if we wish, but it would be repetitive!
