Keep and Bear Arms

Reply to Joe Titteger

October 10, 2001

Mr. Titteger's points regarding the loss of freedom in the United States are well taken. However, there are a couple of errors in his note.

In Kabul, one may NOT own a gun of any kind unless one is a member of the ruling Taliban. Gun control is as strict there as in Washington DC, with summary death sentences for violators.

As for laws prohibiting people from working at their occupations, women in Kabul cannot work at all and are legally forbidden to beg for alms. The latter law is rarely enforced, but the former is enforced with beatings and executions. A widow with children must starve and watch her children starve; she has no legal option to work, and charity is sparse in a country which literally depends on the U.N. for everything it eats.

There is no doubt that Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer pose a greater threat to our liberty than bin Laden. That said, we should not romanticize other countries or imagine that our suffering is comparable to that of the Afghani, Iraqi, or Cuban peoples. Calling the U.S. a "Socialist/Fascist country" is mere histrionics. Are we as free as we should be, as God meant us to be? No. But neither do we suffer as do literally billions of our fellow human beings.

To exaggerate our suffering--even to pretend to compare it to the misery of others--is to demean the sufferings of those people. It undermines the credibility of the exaggerator and reflects badly on our cause.

Our fight for freedom--whether in Congress or at the Kyber Pass--is just in and of itself, without any reference to what others do or do not have. Our country need not be perfect to justify defending it, nor must our subjection be absolute to justify our chafing under it. To imply either is to hand a victory to our detractors in New York and Afghanistan.

	Print This Page

Written By:	Robert Lyman
	Reply to Joe Titteger by Robert Lyman [email protected] October 10, 2001 Mr. Titteger's points regarding the loss of freedom in the United States are well taken. However, there are a couple of errors in his note. In Kabul, one may NOT own a gun of any kind unless one is a member of the ruling Taliban. Gun control is as strict there as in Washington DC, with summary death sentences for violators. As for laws prohibiting people from working at their occupations, women in Kabul cannot work at all and are legally forbidden to beg for alms. The latter law is rarely enforced, but the former is enforced with beatings and executions. A widow with children must starve and watch her children starve; she has no legal option to work, and charity is sparse in a country which literally depends on the U.N. for everything it eats. There is no doubt that Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer pose a greater threat to our liberty than bin Laden. That said, we should not romanticize other countries or imagine that our suffering is comparable to that of the Afghani, Iraqi, or Cuban peoples. Calling the U.S. a "Socialist/Fascist country" is mere histrionics. Are we as free as we should be, as God meant us to be? No. But neither do we suffer as do literally billions of our fellow human beings. To exaggerate our suffering--even to pretend to compare it to the misery of others--is to demean the sufferings of those people. It undermines the credibility of the exaggerator and reflects badly on our cause. Our fight for freedom--whether in Congress or at the Kyber Pass--is just in and of itself, without any reference to what others do or do not have. Our country need not be perfect to justify defending it, nor must our subjection be absolute to justify our chafing under it. To imply either is to hand a victory to our detractors in New York and Afghanistan.