Socialism and Gun Rights - Where do you stand?

[Comrade Chernov]

Do you believe Socialism should support the Right to Bear Arms?

Personally, I do - the way it was explained to me was that the Proletariat needs to be able to arm themselves in case of a crackdown by the upper classes.

[Popular Front of Judea]

To start with the proletariat has the right to self defence. Period. That said there are common sense laws that are appropriate in this pre-revolutionary era. Mandatory gun handling classes are a good start. Too many idiots out there are being shot by "unloaded" guns.

[G4b3n]

The state, bourgeois or socialist, has no business stripping anyone of their ability to bear arms.

[ANTIFA GATE-9]

Marx was strictly pro gun.
"There are no circumstances imaginable, not even victory, under which the proletariat should give up its possession of arms." Karl Marx

[Comrade Jacob]

It is the best way to protect your revolution against revisionism.

[Popular Front of Judea]

Let the revolutionary fratricide begin!


It is the best way to protect your revolution against revisionism.

[Fourth Internationalist]

"There are no circumstances imaginable, not even victory, under which the proletariat should give up its possession of arms." -- Karl Marx

4. Universal arming of the people. In future the armies shall be simultaneously labour armies, so that the troops shall not, as formerly, merely consume, but shall produce more than is necessary for their upkeep.

"The whole population shall be armed." -- "The Demands of the Communist Party in Germany", Marx and Engels

"the workers must be armed and organized. The arming of the whole proletariat with flintlocks, carbines, guns and ammunition must be put in hand directly" -- Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League, March 1850

"Arms and ammunition are on no account to be handed over; every attempt at disarmament must be frustrated, by force if need be."*

[BIXX]

Oh boy this thread again.

I support free ownership of weapons, the state cannot disarm it's people.

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

Yep, part of the consensus here. Revolutions are difficult to attempt without weapons, so the working class should be armed, pre-revolution AND post-revolution.

I won't deny however that I get a little happy whenever the NRA goes into seizures of impotent rage. It gives me a bit of childish glee. :grin:

[Popular Front of Judea]

Yes this thread again. Definitely a sticky candidate.

Google 'site:revleft.com guns'. Smell the testosterone.


Oh boy this thread again.

I support free ownership of weapons, the state cannot disarm it's people.

[the demoralist]

"There are no circumstances imaginable, not even victory, under which the proletariat should give up its possession of arms." Karl Marx
Where did Marx actually say this? Not disputing he did say it, I just can't find it anywhere.

[Comrade Chernov]

Oh? Sorry, I didn't know this thread was common... :blushing:

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

Oh? Sorry, I didn't know this thread was common... :blushing:

S'alright. Sometimes the most important questions are worth asking more than once.

A common misconception is that the left-wing in the U.S. is anti-gun. That only applies to liberals. It also doesn't help that the largest gun lobby in the U.S. is essentially the running dog of the Republican Party.

[Goblin]

Yes, allow the proletariat to bear arms! No guns, no revolution! It`s that simple.

[BIXX]

Oh? Sorry, I didn't know this thread was common... :blushing:

Hahaha, it's ok. They haven't been around as much as lately, but when all the shootings were going on (Aurora, Newtown, etc) they were quite common.

[RedAnarchist]

Workers should have the right to own guns, even if the ruling classes disagree, because fuck them.

[Popular Front of Judea]

It's the dispassionate analysis that brings me back to RevLeft.


Workers should have the right to own guns, even if the ruling classes disagree, because fuck them.

[Brutus]

Where did Marx actually say this? Not disputing he did say it, I just can't find it anywhere.

Marx's Address to the Communist League (1850) is where most of these gun quotes come from.

[blake 3:17]

I'm an anti-gun nut. Hate the things.

One thing I'd say, if you're going to have one or use one -- Learn how to shoot. Worst thing is folks with guns who don't know them.

[Bostana]

The proletariat has the right to arm itself to resist bourgeoisie rule and to protect themselves. But this doesn't mean to become a fucking gun nut, I personally hate it when I explained to by liberal friends that I support the proletariat's right to arm, and then my conservative friends try to align me with them.

[the debater]

The proletariat has the right to arm itself to resist bourgeoisie rule and to protect themselves. But this doesn't mean to become a fucking gun nut, I personally hate it when I explained to by liberal friends that I support the proletariat's right to arm, and then my conservative friends try to align me with them.

I guess a good question to ask would be how the military would be organized in a Marxist country? Would there be a standing army, nuclear weapons, etc? I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that most people here are anti-war for the most part, so maybe that would influence popular consensus on this issue.

[RedBen]

one of few points where i agree with right wingers(even a broken clock is right twice a day). i have owned a gun in varying forms for the last several years. i'm no want to arm the children gun nut, but i am firmly pro gun. my girlfriend is extremely uncomfortable with firearms. she's a liberal, over time her opinions on communism have changed and she is more educated on the left and class struggle. she just today mentioned she should eventually learn more about firearms being that we plan on staying together indefinitely. wish she would have said that when i still had my .22 rifle or .38 revolver, i got a 7.62x54mm now, not something to start with that's for sure. if our financial situation ever gets better, we'll have more variety anyway.

[RedBen]

I guess a good question to ask would be how the military would be organized in a Marxist country? Would there be a standing army, nuclear weapons, etc? I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that most people here are anti-war for the most part, so maybe that would influence popular consensus on this issue.
in the beginning a standing military force might be necessary. that's the reality, we live in a world full of imperialist slavers who ravage like locusts. i don't know about nukes though. i don't think nukes should exist.

[Brandon's Impotent Rage]

In my view, there's a big difference between a gun enthusiast and a gun nut.

Gun enthusiasts view guns as a hobby.

Gun nuts view guns as a religion.

Gun enthusiasts view gun ownership as a responsibility.

Gun nuts view gun ownership as sacred.



See the difference? It's all about attitude. Gun nuts are obnoxious, tactless and above all reactionary individuals who cling to firearms the way a priest clings to a crucifix. Gun enthusiasts on the other hand enjoy the craftsmanship and history of firearms while at the same time respecting the danger that guns possess.

Gun nuts are alot like mall ninjas. They're wannabee tough guys who use guns to hide their own personal inadequacies.

[Spruce]

Against, of course, because I don't want to see more working-class kids die from the antics of gun-totting thugs and yahoos. Guns are tools of death, and there are only a few jobs that must have them.

The communist movement doesn't need armed workers because workers' power comes from having society depend on their consent to work; withdrawing that consent is enough to hold their society hostage.

Other political rebels like nationalists or religious beardos need guns more than us because society doesn't live off their work. They're jockeying to rule over the rest of us, and credible threats of violence are how they get what they want.

[Klaatu]

The only people that do not have a right to own guns are felons, the insane, and those underage.
This would include any dangerous weapon, of course.

[Kassad]

Sweet god, anyone who calls to disarm the working class and allow the armed bodies of the bourgeois state to have a monopoly on weapons should not be on a forum for the ostensibly revolutionary left. We'll fight the ruling class with sticks and harsh language.

[Comrade Chernov]

Against, of course, because I don't want to see more working-class kids die from the antics of gun-totting thugs and yahoos. Guns are tools of death, and there are only a few jobs that must have them.

The communist movement doesn't need armed workers because workers' power comes from having society depend on their consent to work; withdrawing that consent is enough to hold their society hostage.

Other political rebels like nationalists or religious beardos need guns more than us because society doesn't live off their work. They're jockeying to rule over the rest of us, and credible threats of violence are how they get what they want.

The working class =/= the Left.

It's sad, but true. There are Conservatives and Reactionaries who would simply fill in the gaps that the Socialists and Communists amongst the workforce would leave. Then, we would not only have no means of self-defense, we would have no way to support ourselves, and the Capitalist oppressor has won.

The workers must be armed. The Left must be armed.

[Spruce]

The working class =/= the Left.

It's sad, but true. There are Conservatives and Reactionaries who would simply fill in the gaps that the Socialists and Communists amongst the workforce would leave. Then, we would not only have no means of self-defense, we would have no way to support ourselves, and the Capitalist oppressor has won.

The workers must be armed. The Left must be armed.
And the violent psychopath image is winning over a lot of people, is it? People who live with gun violence in their neighbourhoods don't want guns there. Wouldn't blame them if they didn't want pro-gun radicals there either. By surrendering to the Right and the gun lobbyfor seemingly no advantage, the Left lets watery liberal politicians lock up the gun control vote with token gestures.

[Comrade Chernov]

And the violent psychopath image is winning over a lot of people, is it? People who live with gun violence in their neighbourhoods don't want guns there. Wouldn't blame them if they didn't want pro-gun radicals there either. By surrendering to the Right and the gun lobbyfor seemingly no advantage, the Left lets watery liberal politicians lock up the gun control vote with token gestures.

So we're betraying our principles for the sake of gaining votes?

How the hell is following that Marx wrote in the Manifesto "surrendering to the Right"?

[Art Vandelay]

I was too lazy to type up a response, so I just went through some older posts and found one I made the last time this topic came up:


Now as on to the actual topic of the thread, instead of engaging in quote wars on this particular topic (there are indeed times when dropping a quote can be useful during polemics, but I would say that for this topic it isn't), lets just look at this issue rationally. To start I am pro-gun ownership and I think its important to preface my next comment with that; however the idea that the revolution is going to be won with the guns that, we as citizens, have access to pre-revolution, is absurd. The revolution will be won by the proletariat ran sacking barracks, by sections of the army defecting to the side of the proletariat, etc. The modern military is so advanced and complex in industrialized nations (let alone the U.S.) that the idea of engaging in some extended war is ridiculous. Now don't get me wrong, there will indeed be combat, but what I'm saying is lets not think of this in the terms of the Maoist PPW. The proletariat's strength in society does not come from arms, but from their collective relation to the means of production.

As for the reason that I am pro-gun ownership, cause guns are fun. Some of my earliest memories are going out shooting with my dad and this is coming from someone who probably doesn't have it in them to ever kill an animal (I've never been hunting) and is a vegetarian; so basically what I'm saying is I'm not your usual manly man hunter and I'm still pro-gun ownership. When it comes down to it, we as Marxists, know he underlying socio-economic reasons why violence exists in society. Banning guns isn't going to stop poverty and it isn't going to stop violent crime.

What I am most puzzled about though, in all honesty, is why Marxists would waste their time discussing an issue like this. I'm sorry to say it, but if you are anti-gun ownership, then what you are advocating is increased state control and are firmly implanting yourself in the business of reforms (and reinforcing the bourgeoisie's ability to have a monopoly on arms) . Now that this pressing issue has been dealt with, I'm going to go back to discussing revolution and how to help bring it about.

[RedBen]

People who live with gun violence in their neighbourhoods don't want guns there.
i live in south chicago, myself and many others i know completely disagree. sure there are church sponsored anti gun marches, but they don't show the (possibly more) people who DO want guns BECAUSE it's dangerous. alot of my old coworkers owned or were soon to own and getting their gun cards(FOID). i used to pick up applications for FOID cards regularly for some of them. i own, my dad owns, my sister owns, my friends own, alot of my cousins, my old roommates... legally too. there are also alot of people here who own illegally for protection and aren't gang or drug related, can't say i blame em

[Consistent.Surprise]

People who live with gun violence in their neighbourhoods don't want guns there.

So what you're saying is my urban living self, who has had 2 shootings over the past 8 months within a block of me, doesn't want a gun to protect myself & this is true for anyone in a neighborhood that suffers gun violence of any sort?

Sorry. Can't get behind that logic. I need to be able to protect myself. That is why we need to be able to arm ourselves. I'm not saying everyone HAS to have a gun; that is their option but all people should be taught gun safety & know how to fire a pistol and a shotgun.

[helot]

I tend to change my position on the individual ownership of guns occasionally however obviously i do advocate the working class organising itself as an armed force.


Those in favour of gun control piss me off though as generally they find the state being armed acceptable.

[Spruce]

So we're betraying our principles for the sake of gaining votes?

How the hell is following that Marx wrote in the Manifesto "surrendering to the Right"?
What principles are these? Do you not grasp the context that the manifesto was written in, when calls to disarm the workers were calls to break up the barricades? If Marx came back from the grave and the first thing he did was register with the NRA and encourage every communist to give their money to Ruger & Co for the revolution, then I’ll have to disagree with him there.

[Red_Banner]

"
An oppressed class which does not strive to learn to use arms, to acquire arms, only deserves to be treated like slaves. We cannot, unless we have become bourgeois pacifists or opportunists, forget that we are living in a class society from which there is no way out, nor can there be, save through the class struggle and the overthrow of the power of the ruling class.
In every class society, whether based on slavery, serfdom, or, as at present, on wage-labour, the oppressor class is always armed."-Lenin

"
The militia detachments for defense against fascism are the first step on the road to the arming of the proletariat, not the last. Our slogan is:
"Arm the proletariat and the revolutionary peasants!""-Trotsky

[Comrade Chernov]

What principles are these? Do you not grasp the context that the manifesto was written in, when calls to disarm the workers were calls to break up the barricades? If Marx came back from the grave and the first thing he did was register with the NRA and encourage every communist to give their money to Ruger & Co for the revolution, then I’ll have to disagree with him there.

And tell me, why would you want your Comrades slaughtered in the streets because they have no weapons to defend themselves with once the crackdown begins?

Or maybe you're a Fabian?

[Comrade Samuel]

Marx was strictly pro gun.
"There are no circumstances imaginable, not even victory, under which the proletariat should give up its possession of arms." Karl Marx

I get this but let's not forget that quoting old dead guys on their opinions about guns is exactly what our enemies are doing right now.

You're damn right every proletariat has a right to bear arms, that being said I have serious concerns about civilian ownership of automatic weapons. I get that we need to be able to defend ourselves against a tyrannical regime but when that regime has tanks, drones and nuclear weapons I seriously doubt if your AR-15 will make any difference. Matter of fact I'd be willing to say America's shitty approach towards the issue contributes greatly to the fact that we have more gun-related violence than any other country in the western world. Our culture plays into it, our failure to help the mentally ill plays into it as well but the question we should be asking is what will stop it? I personally think some gun control would go a long way.

[Red_Banner]

"I have serious concerns about civilian ownership of automatic weapons. I get that we need to be able to defend ourselves against a tyrannical regime but when that regime has tanks, drones and nuclear weapons I seriously doubt if your AR-15 will make any difference."

You think that stopped the Viet Cong?

You think that is stopping the Palestinians?

[Comrade Samuel]

"I have serious concerns about civilian ownership of automatic weapons. I get that we need to be able to defend ourselves against a tyrannical regime but when that regime has tanks, drones and nuclear weapons I seriously doubt if your AR-15 will make any difference."

You think that stopped the Viet Cong?

You think that is stopping the Palestinians?

Well I doubt the possibility of an armed conflict breaking out in U.S any time soon furthermore the military forces of South Vietnam and Israel aren't/weren't all that intimidating of foes without the U.S pumping millions dollars into them and committing hundreds of it's own troops to aid/advise them.

The point is we continue to witness massacres every 2-3 months and instead of focusing on the absurdity of how deadly our killing machines are when compared to those owned by other westerners, we instead feel the need to blame video games or some evil liberal plot to take over the world.

Let's not forget that both of your examples are of imperialist ventures abroad, it's not like the government could pass some law and prevent them from getting guns even if they wanted to (which obviously they don't because imperialists need boogymen).

[Popular Front of Judea]

You know with a few tweaks this is pretty much a libertarian thread in Reddit ...

[DasFapital]

Well we cant fight the police by pelting them with copies of the Little Red Book now can we? If you look back at history the left has always been some of the biggest advocates of weapons rights. In the early twentieth century, just before some of the first modern gun laws were passed, miners in the Western US regularly took up arms against corporate thugs. Twas some badass times!:thumbup1:

[synthesis]

Well we cant fight the police by pelting them with copies of the Little Red Book now can we? If you look back at history the left has always been some of the biggest advocates of weapons rights. In the early twentieth century, just before some of the first modern gun laws were passed, miners in the Western US regularly took up arms against corporate thugs. Twas some badass times!:thumbup1:

Times when those same working class revolutionaries were being slaughtered like dogs.

I'm pro-gun, I love shooting them, yet it's important to recognize that the right-wing is always going to be able to outdo us when it comes to violence. They'll always have more money for weapons and more leeway when it comes to the bourgeois state's legal system. Just another reason why the revolution will be won largely by social rather than military means.

[o well this is ok I guess]

Marx was strictly pro gun.
"There are no circumstances imaginable, not even victory, under which the proletariat should give up its possession of arms." Karl Marx Is this a real quote
where is it from

[Desy]

"There are no circumstances imaginable, not even victory, under which the proletariat should give up its possession of arms." -- Karl Marx

4. Universal arming of the people. In future the armies shall be simultaneously labour armies, so that the troops shall not, as formerly, merely consume, but shall produce more than is necessary for their upkeep.

"The whole population shall be armed." -- "The Demands of the Communist Party in Germany", Marx and Engels

"the workers must be armed and organized. The arming of the whole proletariat with flintlocks, carbines, guns and ammunition must be put in hand directly" -- Address of the Central Committee to the Communist League, March 1850

"Arms and ammunition are on no account to be handed over; every attempt at disarmament must be frustrated, by force if need be."*

I came to this thread looking to see if you were going to post some liberal rhetoric, like you did in past threads on guns, but I'm glad to see your stance has changed!!!

Keep it up, comrade.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

If this wasn't a leftist forum I'd have thought that this was a thread full of patriots. You could even swap the Marx quotes with some lines from the confeds.

[Desy]

If this wasn't a leftist forum I'd have thought that this was a thread full of patriots. You could even swap the Marx quotes with some lines from the confeds.

What the hell is this reactionary drivel? Let's use your style of writing..

Since you aren't banned from a leftist forum for saying reactionary shit, I'd have thought this was a reactionary liberal forum.

[Consistent.Surprise]

I think those of us who are pro-gun ownership are being treated unjustly because some are assuming it means we want to arm ourselves to the gills. In my case, that isn't my view.

First: gun safety & education & use of guns should be taught. Why? Do we not educate ourselves on things we may not agree with? Should not all people understand the power behind using a firearm so they grasp the weight of such ownership (if they choose to carry?). Ignorance is not bliss when you live in a country where most people can carry.

Second: I am not advocating high end or extended clips or heavy artillery; this is not Firefly & we all do not need to have a Jayne arsenal.

Third: I am advocating that IF A PERSON CHOOSES to have a gun, they can. What falls under this is in my first point but I also support gun locks.

I don't own but if another fatal shooting happens within a block of me in the next 6 months, I'm getting one.

[Popular Front of Judea]

Whether it's the sacred 2nd Amendment or arming the proletariat these gun threads are pretty much interchangeable. It's all about compensation and fantasy.

[Popular Front of Judea]

Revisionist! :grin:


I think those of us who are pro-gun ownership are being treated unjustly because some are assuming it means we want to arm ourselves to the gills. In my case, that isn't my view.

First: gun safety & education & use of guns should be taught. Why? Do we not educate ourselves on things we may not agree with? Should not all people understand the power behind using a firearm so they grasp the weight of such ownership (if they choose to carry?). Ignorance is not bliss when you live in a country where most people can carry.

Second: I am not advocating high end or extended clips or heavy artillery; this is not Firefly & we all do not need to have a Jayne arsenal.

Third: I am advocating that IF A PERSON CHOOSES to have a gun, they can. What falls under this is in my first point but I also support gun locks.

[Consistent.Surprise]

Whether it's the sacred 2nd Amendment or arming the proletariat these gun threads are pretty much interchangeable. It's all about compensation and fantasy.

I disagree. I don't see folks spouting the same crap my Libertarian friends do. I read it as we need to make sure that when the shit hits the fan, we can defend however that may be. It could be words. It could be (most likely) violence. It could be a dance off (which would be sweet, but who votes?).

[Consistent.Surprise]

Revisionist! :grin:

Back that up.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

Yeah, I think "gun ownership" misses the point, and the framing of this debate is pretty useless. Rather, the questions we should be asking about who in particular should be armed, in what circumstances are guns useful or not, etc. The reality is that the state will always have guns, and simply saying, "Oh, 'let's get rid of guns'" is some magic-fairy-land shit.

What we need is, like, more critical intervention: Why doesn't the left provide firearms safety workshops - workshops that could also provide a forum to discuss their strategic use in terms of community self-defense, in terms of confronting rape culture, etc.? Abandoning this terrain to "bad politics" is suicidal.

[Popular Front of Judea]

This is one of the best responses so far. Probably should close this thread before it reverts to the mean.


Yeah, I think "gun ownership" misses the point, and the framing of this debate is pretty useless. Rather, the questions we should be asking about who in particular should be armed, in what circumstances are guns useful or not, etc. The reality is that the state will always have guns, and simply saying, "Oh, 'let's get rid of guns'" is some magic-fairy-land shit.

What we need is, like, more critical intervention: Why doesn't the left provide firearms safety workshops - workshops that could also provide a forum to discuss their strategic use in terms of community self-defense, in terms of confronting rape culture, etc.? Abandoning this terrain to "bad politics" is suicidal.

[Glitchcraft]

We should all have our own drones, you know for hunting.
:)

[Flying Purple People Eater]

What the hell is this reactionary drivel? Let's use your style of writing..

Since you aren't banned from a leftist forum for saying reactionary shit, I'd have thought this was a reactionary liberal forum.

And what part of what I said was reactionary? Pointing out the obvious? :laugh:

I stand corrected. This thread looks like a conversation between your usual Texan patriot nutters who think that their freedom is being taken away because they can't own a Panzer.

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

And what part of what I said was reactionary? Pointing out the obvious? :laugh:

I stand corrected. This thread looks like a conversation between your usual Texan patriot nutters who think that their freedom is being taken away because they can't own a Panzer.

As opposed to a conversation of namby liberals who think it's fine as long as heavy weapons are the exclusive province of the "legitimate" state?

Again, you're precisely missing the point by talking about guns within the awful framework presented by the bourgeois press and politicians.

Texan patriot nutters miss the point too: their freedom isn't taken away because they can't own LMGs, their freedom is taken away because they don't even point the guns they do have at the right people.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

As opposed to a conversation of namby liberals who think it's fine as long as heavy weapons are the exclusive province of the "legitimate" state?

Again, you're precisely missing the point by talking about guns within the awful framework presented by the bourgeois press and politicians.

Texan patriot nutters miss the point too: their freedom isn't taken away because they can't own LMGs, their freedom is taken away because they don't even point the guns they do have at the right people.

You seem to be under the impression that I was speaking in support of gun bans. I wasn't.

What is this framework with which the bourgeois press plays off it's dastardly schemes about guns, and how have I used it to argue anything? As far as I can see, all I did was make an observation.

And I highly doubt that guns being legalised now will make that much of a difference in a revolutionary situation.

[RedBen]

As opposed to a conversation of namby liberals who think it's fine as long as heavy weapons are the exclusive province of the "legitimate" state?

Again, you're precisely missing the point by talking about guns within the awful framework presented by the bourgeois press and politicians.

Texan patriot nutters miss the point too: their freedom isn't taken away because they can't own LMGs, their freedom is taken away because they don't even point the guns they do have at the right people.
get an FFL and you CAN own those weapons. call em "dealer sample's" for the purpose of selling to "leo agencies" and educational purposes. it's all in the wording really.... this is still america

[Glitchcraft]

Whether it's the sacred 2nd Amendment or arming the proletariat these gun threads are pretty much interchangeable. It's all about compensation and fantasy.

It's not surprising the cop lover doesn't fully endorse the workers being armed or understand the necessity of an armed working class.

[Popular Front of Judea]

To start with the proletariat has the right to self defence. Period. [Emphasis added] That said there are common sense laws that are appropriate in this pre-revolutionary era. Mandatory gun handling classes are a good start. Too many idiots out there are being shot by "unloaded" guns.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/showpost.php?p=2655740&postcount=2

Comrade you are crossing over the line that separates legitimate intellectual disagreement and harassment.


It's not surprising the cop lover doesn't fully endorse the workers being armed or understand the necessity of an armed working class.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

I disagree with the right to bear arms, totally.

1. It is not a long-term solution to protecting one's self, or one's class, against crime or counter-revolution. Blood only leads to more blood. And, furthermore, I thought us Socialists were meant to focus on rehabilitation, not revenge, punishment, or retribution.

2. If the avowed point of bearing arms is to defend ourselves against counter-revolution, then it's pointless because, in a revolutionary period where large semblances of the bourgeois state, bourgeois armies and capitalist class as a whole are intact, they will have weapons of destruction that we could never hope to match. Only when the workers in the armies refuse to side with their higher-ups and turn to the side of the rest of the workers will military might be on our side.

3. There is a very clear correlation between gun societies and higher crime rates. Therefore, it's not in the long term interests of Socialists to continue to purport gun societies, in the interests of keeping certain crimes to a minimum, and avoiding crimes caused by factors other than material necessity, especially violent ones.