It is unfortunate but none the less true that the majority of gun violence in America is black-on-black, especially in urban cities with gun control. It has become part of the culture in those areas, fueled by a welfare state. A large percentage of this gun violence occurs in government housing areas where poverty is subsidized. The prohibition of drugs has created a huge black market and urban gangs contribute to the bulk of the gun violence. Note, that these gangs thrive in places where the common citizen is not permitted to carry a weapon. Millions of gun owners every day do not abuse the power they have -- the vast majority of gun violence is carried out by people with 'Illegal' guns committing acts of violence against each other even more than upon the unarmed innocent.

Because there will always be armed people with bad intentions, there will always need to be people with equivalent powers to defend against them. Police cannot defend us, they can only get involved after the fact.

Mick, it used to be considered an honorable right for the Englishman to be armed. Once the socialists took over and restricted arms in Britain, crime statistics doubled over the next few years.

In the US, gun deaths are a fraction of deaths by automobile. Death by falling is still the number one cause of 'pre-mature' death. Gun-related deaths are far below the top 100 causes of death -- more people drown, for example. Over the last 10 years, many state gun restrictions have been declared unconstitutional and more and more people are carrying - even in cities like Detroit, Chicago, DC, NYC where gun crimes are high. And as a result gun crime is plummeting as stories of people defending themselves are being reported.

People are defending themselves again -- and the socialists do not want it, they want people to be obedient and dependent to justify THEIR existence because people cannot be trusted with powers that could be used in defense of their thieving.

The apparent threat of force can deter as well as an actual threat of force. To 'trick' predators is built-in to many species, man is no different. A basic tactic in war.

Socialist governments are essentially authoritarian. After being fed more power and influence, they take on totalitarian forms like communism, fascism, despotism. Liberty lovers are the reformers, the real revolutionaries. Simply, liberty lovers empower each other, while socialists empower the government (State).

Excellent! Have we such a poor memory that we have forgotten all the un-kept promises of those we voted for in the past? I'd like to 'fast' from government for a while -- to abstain from being ruled, to let Nature balance things out.

Waffler says, "What it can vote on is decided by the 51 percent, quit changing the subject." ;-) Too funny! So 51% of the people can decide what to vote on next? I remember that -- Peppermint Patty would invite herself over for dinner and then take a vote on what Charlie Brown would be serving. What Waffler ignores are the inherent rights of people to say "NO" to the will of the mob. Not everything is up for a vote. Waffler says whatever 51% of the people vote on is the way things are -- for now, until the next vote. Talk about tyranny!

"Power corrupts the few, while weakness corrupts the many. Hatred, malice, rudeness, intolerance, and suspicion are the faults of weakness. The resentment of the weak does not spring from any injustice done to them but from their sense of inadequacy and impotence." Hoffer hits the nail on the head. Note, that government legislation continually dis-empowers the people with 'regulations' that ultimately make them dependent upon government largess. Taking control of the issuance of currency, gun control, income taxes, medicine, transportation, you name it, has all been done in the name of 'security' while empowering the wealthy further and disarming the populace completely so that they have not the power to resist.

So true. Liberty starts with the individual who must make his/her way in the world. There are real dangers as well as real blessings. Every animal in the world works to survive -- none can afford to do otherwise. In the 'civilized' world, animals are corralled, bred and domesticated. Within the human species some live like schools of fish and others like sharks -- there are 'leader' types and 'follower' types within every species. Keeping collective power in check has always been the challenge of a people wishing to live free.

Alright!

Thanks, Mike! I do so enjoy people's personal stories of witnessing 'miracles.' Your cup indeed runneth over. ;-)

I did not learn in school that the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution itself, are the rules for the government, not for the people. Instead of a government with limited powers, we are led to believe that the government is omnipotent and that it should focus its power on the causes of the 'powerless' (who only became that way because of centralized power.)

Right, Mike. Is the diffusion 'natural' or regulated? I would say that, naturally, power is already diffused among everyone. It is the regulation of power, the 'distribution' of power, which is the centralization of power that is the threat to liberty.

Douglas is probably most famous for speaking profound truth about liberty while promoting and defending authoritarianism.

And the primary danger of power is that you can do more evil. Power, like a weapon or tool, is neither good nor bad. The intent of the one who wields the power governs the result.

One more thing, regarding "Freedom is a myth!" ;-) Freedom is a 'way' - your way. Like playing in a band, you are free to choose a tune, but then we all join in. During the song, there are many interactions and improvisations -- there are a great many notes that can be played, BUT there are some notes that absolutely will NOT be in harmony with this particular song and are to be avoided. Take note, that there is no music unless someone plays it. Thus there is no freedom if it is not exercised. It can be exercised if I have the power to exercise it. Freedom is a 'way' not an end.

I wouldn't call Hitler, Stalin or Mao 'courageous.' I don't even think a bully thinks his bullying is courageous. What fears do they have necessitating 'courage'? No need for courage when you have 'no fear.' Anything without conscience is 'wild.'

"No fear, and no conscience makes a wild beast."

Robert, I do understand what you are trying to convey. It just seems painfully obvious the lengths you go to re-word and re-define what are essentially Christian teachings. If you took a Gnostic view of the Bible I think you might find a great deal of similarity between your philosophy of the power of ONE and God. Certainly you are capable of comprehending a greater understanding of God (i.e. the ONE) than the obviously limited and contrived version you believe many Christians to hold absolute. Hypocrisy of the self-righteous is all too evident, whether religious or secular -- I invite you to take a fresh look.

The truth is the truth is the truth, and I do believe the truth wants to be known, whether through the eyes of a Christian or a Buddhist or an Atheist, the truth will make as much of itself known as one is willing to bear.

I do believe in the One Song, and I can be in harmony with it or not -- and there is undeniable power in 'resonance' (e.g. electricity). But there are MANY verses, bars and measures, in this opus, and I'll sing the notes that best resonate within me. For me, all of life is a dialogue with the universe. It's like playing in a band -- to make music, everyone has to be in tune, in time, and listening to each other.

Robert, you've got a good heart -- how about acknowledging the voluntary charity and goodwill of others? Real charity and goodwill make the world go 'round, not compelled social services.

I like "freedom from forces and circumstances which would turn man into a thing, which would impose on man the passivity and predictability of matter." To turn man into domesticated animals, passive and predictable, has been the goal of those with the power to do so since 'civilization' emerged. We are still born with claims upon our labors and territory. Liberation from the oppression of un-truth and those claiming lordship over us arises within each generation, but it either comes from within or cannot take hold. I do believe that self-reliance is built-in to our nature along with our natural socialization interests. Both independent and interdependent, adjusting to the times, humankind progresses holistically and in accordance with Nature's God. The controllers do not trust in Nature.

So, our system and processes of governing should include periodic 'death' of government bureaus so that they do not become eternal and grow into Leviathans. If the systems continue, it does not matter who gets 'elected' to fill positions of administration, the 'rules' themselves direct the tyranny, while government employees simply 'do their job.' Just as unprofitable businesses eventually close, so must government bureaus that have exceeded their lawful authority and/or do nothing but employ government contractors. Tyranny is simply business as usual.

Porter is right on, so much that we see that 'war' is the go-to solution for any problem. The War on Drugs is the primary impetus behind the growth of the Police State, and there is no denying that the drug war has claimed a high percentage of poor minorities as the victims. The 'cure' is worse than the 'disease.' Movements like Black Lives Matter have the support they do because of direct experience of being under the thumb of 'the man.' Just like the Occupy Wall Street crowd, their handlers hijack the group and distract them from the true source of oppression.

We war on each other by claiming entitlement to the fruits of others' labor. In the medical field, war is waged against disease, aggressively attacking and killing as the preferred modus operandi, while prevention is hardly addressed.

War is destruction pure and simple. It does not create a new or better world, it just ends this one, all of it. What makes for a good world? Doing good. How do we keep it? Maintain it. Do we tear up the whole garden to root out the weeds?

War is stealing. War is killing. War is doing evil. Defense becomes revenge, then domination of the people.

The 'battle' is where it has always been -- within. Hearts and minds.

Mike, this guy sounds like you! ;-)

Putting religion aside for a moment, there does seem to be rooted in Western culture an assumed obligation to help others. Democracy itself is the political philosophy of those obligations. However, the corruption can be the same as with the authoritarian church: compelled service and tribute. Good intentions were the basis, but in the end, playing God becomes the norm.

Great questions, Robert! There's enough there to discuss for hours. For me, 'freedom' is 'a way' rather than 'an end.' I am free to break as many statutes as I may, I must also bear the consequences. Perhaps I may get fined or locked up for the 'offense' (i.e. my choices), that only makes me a freeman under oppression. I will ALWAYS be a free man because I take responsibility for my life -- all of it. When I say "I am responsible" out loud to myself, perhaps only just realizing for the first time how far my responsibility reaches, that's what I mean by "taking responsibility."

You want an end to war in Syria? Take responsibility for it. Boom. When you are ready to say, "I am responsible for whether there is war or peace in Syria," and truly 'realize' it, you will affect change in Syria. Dare I say, if you don't someone else will (why is there war there anyway?). For whom in the world would the above declaration best fit and have the greatest impact? Until someone takes responsibility, the current claims still stand.

Regarding "the power of ONE," blurring the distinction between freedom and power leads to confusion. I do understand the "power" of "ONE" big group or ONE big guy, and yep, expect no freedom in such a scenario.

"Think for a moment about the essence of universal freedom/thought, universal love, and universal understanding. If you think hard enough then you will understand the power of ONE."

;-) Sounds an awful lot like some people's definition of God. What 'power' is rendered in universal thought, universal love, and universal understanding? Sounds like the power of prayer, visualization, meditation -- do you experience any of that? It kind of seems like you are asking people to be charitable because of all the suffering in the world -- isn't that what religious people do? Isn't it out of love and understanding that so many people offer their service and charity? As for love and understanding, the truth can cut like a knife, so it always must be tempered with Love.

"Without freedom to tell the truth, we have no freedom." Like "the truth shall set you free"?

We are not free because of the One, another way of saying God's will is done. But consider that if I want to drive to New York City, there are a lot of different roads, but I DO have to drive on a road. I can pick a lane, a speed, a radio station, an attitude. There's a lot of play in there -- but no less free from consequences. If I miss an exit, I've got to figure out how to get back. But I am still 100% free the entire time. I am responsible for being where I am and wanting to go somewhere else and for getting there. So once on the road, I have no one to blame but myself. ;-)

I am free to fly if I have the power to do so. If I am born with wings, do I have the right to fly? What if I am a fish? Is a fish not free because he cannot fly? The Universe is a BIG 'One' -- it's everything, All. But I am 'one' being, within a body, through which I experience and interact with the MANY (not just one), in different lands, in different worlds, on a speck of a planet, orbiting a star that is but a droplet in a cloud of stars that are themselves ENDLESS in this Uni-verse (One song).

My problem with the philosophy of 'the One' or just 'One' is that's the end of the discussion. To believe in the One is to believe in the Universe, the One Song. The universe is not just what it is but what it is doing. OK we are One, but what are we doing? Yes, the philosophy of the One claims all, including freedom. The 'One' is already free -- the universe cannot be yoked. But we WITHIN the One and OF the One and AMONG the One (what do you call others?) are indeed as free as we can be. ;-)

Democracy is regulated suffering with the intent to distribute the suffering equally. Those that do not suffer are the opposition, and thus the enemy and blamed for the suffering of everyone else. The end result is not the end of suffering but suffering for all -- because it is only fair. A culture of entitlement, victimhood, and dependence turns suffering into currency. A nation of cry-babies clinging to Daddy Warbucks.

Very interesting, Ron.