{AynRandinIndia:362} Re: With Gun Control, Cost Benefit Analysis Is Amoral

5 views
Skip to first unread message

Poonam Kapoor Vasudeva

unread,
Jan 18, 2013, 8:49:40 AM1/18/13
to Ayn Rand In India
I hope this gets to the main page.
Thanks Aditya for mentioning that you agree with me.
I don't know where my last message is.
Anyhow - the danger as I said of intellectualising such a serious grim situation on the ground cannot be repeated enough.
If once it has been proved time and again that unobstructed access to guns and assault weapons - I've seen the pictures showing those ugly assault weapons - if once and many many times it has been proved against every shred and sinew doubt that the gun culture prevalent in USA is lethal and life threatening of not one but entire groups of innocent people - then why should anyone argue in favour of private ownership of guns ? Why does this at all come under the purview of Individual Freedoms - Rights of Man - Ayn Rand - ARI - and highly educated men like Binswanger writing tomes of strangely enunciated logic and reason to support his point of view beneath the lofty umbrella of ARI???
If Ayn Rand did support this so called freedom to own a gun - even the atom bomb - at any time in her life - well then - she would NOT have after hearing of the heinous crime of 20 babies being killed by a 17 year old lunatic who had also butchered his mother and then also his teachers - why would she have NOT declared this to be the ultimate evil act by any individual on earth - why would she have NOT condemned it in the face of such a river of blood and where the parents of those babies were not shown the bodies of those babies so horrific was the sight - why would she NOT have allowed her own  Voice of Reason to tell her to support a  gun control legislation - and freedom and rights of man and other such be damned?
She would have.
Above all - above all considerations of this intellectual thought and that intellectual thought - she was a woman who deeply understood the value of human life and glorified the value of human life - and if that human life is in danger then she would not advocate to support any law that puts that life in danger of unexpected sudden death at the hands of an insane gun toting individual and therefore individual rights be damned in the face of such a danger of such a magnitude.
I have read all her fiction and non-fiction books too many times - I have not read her journals - not as yet - and I am absolutely  certain of what I say.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages