"Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another : reason and force . If you want me to do something for you , you have a choice of either convincing me via argument , or force me to do your bidding under threat of force . Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories , without exception . Reason or force , that 's it . In a truly moral and civilized society , people exclusively interact through persuasion . Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction , and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm , as paradoxical as it may sound to some . When I carry a gun , you can not deal with me by force . You have to use reason and try to persuade me , because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force . The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger , a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger , and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats . The gun removes the disparity in physical strength , size , or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender . There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations . These are the people who think that we 'd be more civilized if all guns were removed from society , because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job . That , of course , is only true if the mugger 's potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat -- it has no validity when most of a mugger 's potential marks are armed . People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young , the strong , and the many , and that 's the exact opposite of a civilized society . A mugger , even an armed one , can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly . Then there 's the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury . This argument is fallacious in several ways . Without guns involved , confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser . People who think that fists , bats , sticks , or stones do n't constitute lethal force watch too much TV , where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst . The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender , not the stronger attacker . If both are armed , the field is level . The gun is the only weapon that 's as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter . It simply would n't work as well as a force equalizer if it was n't both lethal and easily employable . When I carry a gun , I do n't do so because I am looking for a fight , but because I 'm looking to be left alone . The gun at my side means that I can not be forced , only persuaded . I do n't carry it because I 'm afraid , but because it enables me to be unafraid . It does n't limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason , only the actions of those who would do so by force . It removes force from the equation ... and that 's why carrying a gun is a civilized act ."
"Just in case you missed it :"
"beings only have two ways to deal with one another : reason and force I can not be forced , only persuaded . I do n't carry"
"Just in case you missed"