Morality of Self Defense

I posted this separately from the gun thread below because it does not quite fit. I think one thing Hawk's post brought up is the question of the morality of self defense. Once we answer this question, the question of gun rights becomes clearer IMO.


I think individuals have the right to defend themselves. I think it is moral for them to do so using all reasonable force. I would not go so far as to say somebody who does not defend themselves is immoral, however. I think this because all that is good, all progress that is made, all work that is done, comes from the minds of individuals. Everything a human does comes from his own mind when all is said and done. Since anything of value comes from individual effort, the individual is deserving of the utmost protection, morally and legally. This means that nobody can morally use force on another improperly- to hurt them. Hence, murder is wrong. Theft is wrong because the thief is appropriating somebody else's effort from them. Akin to a form of mini-slavery if you will.


Thus a person has inherent value and possesses his own life. His most cherished right is the right to this life, because all other rights follow that primary right. Nobody else can just go kill him or physically damage him. For this reason, the right to self defense is a very important right. It protects not just bodily integrity and physical existence, but the self-worth of an individual. For if we say a criminal has a higher right to your body than you do, it means the criminal is not worse than or equal to you, but in fact is better than you. I refuse to submit to another's improper physical force upon me; I demand the right to defend myself. And really nobody can take that right away from me, even if a government would punish me for its exercise. I understand England is doing this now in that it is curtailing the right to self-defense, even when a gun is not used. I think such a law is immoral.


Now the question is what tools should be allowed for such self-defense? I believe it is the hallmark of humanity itself to use the mind to create tools appropriate to succeed in our environment. The gun is such a tool at this stage in our development. It is very good for the job at hand, that of protecting individuals from the improper use of force by criminals, warlords, or oppressive governments. Its track record is excellent in this regard. The gun is small, efficient, effective in stopping humans who have tried to kill others. An old lady has the same right to her life as a young, strong individual who is skilled in unarmed fighting. The gun allows her to even the scales a bit and potentially defend herself from attack. Or maybe from going off to a reeducation or concentration camp. The use of the gun in such a case is moral. The gun itself has no moral value; only the act of its use has no such a value.


Because the gun is such an effective tool for self defense, and the right of self defense is so important, I believe people have the right to use the appropriate tool to defend themselves. Banning guns takes away the right to self defense because it denies people the appropriate tool. Even if you let people defend themselves with clubs or pepper foam or their hands, you have denied them a right. It is the same as giving people the right of freedom of speech, but denying them the use of writing. It does not make sense.


All this does not mean I think people must have a gun to be moral, although I have seen arguments that come close to such a position. Because I value individual choice so much, I recognize that some people may choose going without weapons, or even going without defending themselves. That is fine and is their choice. But defending myself with appropriate means is my choice. I certainly have the obligation to refrain from any improper use of force on another, as do we all.


The realities of the world are such that guns are sometimes necessary. I would be very happy if that were not so. Then the right of self defense could be exercised with lesser tools. A shot is not moral where a punch would suffice. In a perfect world, no self defense, physical or even verbal would be needed. We do not live in such a world.