Re: META: Not another flamewar (BUT RE: a bit of GUNS & a bit of (meta?)

Mark Phillips (
Sat, 05 Jun 1999 13:12:37 CDT

(The bulk of this message is intended for everyone, not just Joe)

Thank very much, Joe, for your re-cap of my rif, and your comments. I was typing so fast that I grammatically/logically screwed up alot of it. E.G.: "2a" should read something to the effect that it is COUNTERINTUITIVE that an obviously deranged, insane, psychotic (whatever...) person should not be PROHIBITED/PROSCRIBED from obtaining/possessing/using a deadly weapon. But Joe and most or all the rest of y'all, obviously "got" it as written anyway; but I do apologize for the bass-ackward incoherent screw-up! And, Joe, your added comments were right-on. THANKS again! So what's the controversy, then? With suitable Deesian modifications and protocols, I would seem nonetheless to side with Mike, Brian, and, if I've understood his contributions correctly, Mark Unicorn (though sometimes his stuff seemed a bit inconsistent--BUT that may well have been my own MISreading/MISinterpretation due to reading to damn fast and cursorily)
(same goes for Billy Brown's stuff on guns, etc.) The point is, surely
competent persons (adults--but I'd say even 18-yr. olds and maybe even take it down to, say, 16 or even 15---this is admittedly yet another "gray"/problematic (sub)area) have a (natural, not merely "conventional") RIGHT to, as it were, pack heat, if they damn well desire to do so. I happen, interestingly enough, to NOT (yet, anyway) own a firearm--yet I'm nonetheless a strong supporter of a rather robust (interpretation of the) 2nd Amendment.

It's a conservative/libertarian cliche--and yet TRUE: If guns are outlawed, only outlaws (and Der STAT) will have guns--and then heaven help us! (And I'm NOT at all a conservative, by the way---I vacillate between (a slightly "leftist") anarcho-capitalist and libertarian anarcho-communist!)

But if we culturally and (meta)jurisprudentially emphasize and concentrate on ***DEFENSE***, then I think the prospects are pretty good that we can
(eventually) have (evolved) as a standard (i.e., "default")
macro-environmental protocol the kind of macro-level u-fog (or whatever) "active shield" (of a sort) that is programmed to disallow the initiation of AGGRESSION against another person or their "property" (I use scare-quotes just now because I don't want, at this time, to take up (jump into) the whole "rif" raff (as is were!!) on property, property rights, copyrights, etc., which, admittedly, needs alot of work/clarification/elucidation). This is, of course, presuming that we SURVIVE and flourish, instead of getting snuffed out on the way to nano-Eutopia.

Also, one should note that the above alluded-to macro-level active shield protocol could certainly be modified/turned(temporarily)-off so as to allow for people into "Medieval-Times-for-REAL" (so to speak) and/or some sort of "ULTIMATE-Ultimate-Fighting-Challenge" or "Conan-the Barbarian-for-REAL"
(you get the point), can punch, kick, choke, stab, chop, garrotte, and shoot
the hell outta each other (presumably to be "put back together again" by advanced nanotech). (Ettinger briefly discusses something very similar in his book, MAN INTO SUPERMAN, as many or most of you are probably familiar with.)

One last bibliographic rif: If you haven't already, please check out Richard Epstein's stuff (especially TAKINGS, SIMPLE RULES FOR A COMPLEX SOCIETY, and PRINCIPLES OF A FREE SOCIETY) **and** Randy Barnett's great new work, THE STRUCTURE OF LIBERTY. As I'm sure Tom (Morrow, that is) would agree, these are very good works to start with to kick off one's own ruminations on (meta)jurisprudence and (meta) political philosophy. (And, of course, it's also good to check out Hayek, Lon Fuller, Roscoe Pound, and Oliver W. Holmes too, just as further background). Also, for moral-psychological background to social philosophy in general, I highly recommend Loren Lomasky's PERSONS, RIGHTS, AND THE MORAL COMMUNITY, and the
(LAMENTABLY!!!) late David L. Norton's magnificent masterpiece, PERSONAL

Best regards always to one and all,

MCP                   Beyond Eutopia--Toward (Meta)Cosmic Horizons!!

P.S. I'm NOT trying to keep the "gun-thing", so to speak, going, much less bash the hell out of a comatose equus, but if any do feel that the position(s) taken herein is(are) somehow flawed/dangerous/stupid or whatever, then PLEASE, please, send me your thoughts/critiques---this is serious stuff, because the meta-level principles involved are also involved in nano-weapons issues, ruminations, etc., so it does help to dialogue on this stuff, I think. (But no "flamewar" diatribes, please!)

Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit