Safety Versus Security, by Michael Z. Williamson

I have a few brief observations:

Your typical citizen is a pushover who’s all-in on living in a police state to be “safe.”

Example 1:

A while back, I had an Australian woman perusing the wares in my booth. She looked at a reproduction rapier. “Very nice. But we wouldn’t be allowed to own something like that. Keeps us safe, though.”*

“Oh, are random rapier duels in the street something you worried about in Sydney?”

You could almost see her neurons engage.

*Swords are not, in fact, banned in Aus. But that she assumed they were proves my point again.

Example 2:

When I had my store in the mall. Lots of people buying swords, paying by check, and I ask for ID and note their info on the check against NSF.

“I assume you need my ID so these can be registered like guns?”

“No, I’m just making sure your check is good. Swords are not registered anywhere in this country, and very few places register guns.”

But they happily performed “Papers, please” for anyone asking, assuming it was some government purpose to keep them “safe”. – MZW

JWR Adds: All of the gun and knife shows that Mike Williamson had planned have surely been cancelled, for at least the next two months. But he is still operating via mail order.  Take a look at his knives in the “Handmade Knives” section at:


  1. Liberty is risky. It is often not comfortable. But it is a dear treasure.
    Gold often enslaves its owner who hoards it instead of making it serve him.

    The evil is not merely that people will sacrifice liberty for security, but they will do so for a “mess o’ pottage” security theater that has your daughters, sisters, wives, and mothers (pink cat knit hat) grabbed by the TSA that only finds 1 in 20 guns.

    But the tyrants don’t give me a choice to fly free, even if there is a 0.000001% of a terrorist attack. And so far I’m really (hopping) mad at even the WY restrictions, and would literally rather die than be under “house arrest” without any warrant or due process. I’d rather live two weeks free in the sun and wind that live another century in the Tyrant’s cage.

    1. Your Right to swing your fist Ends, when others have reason to feel threatened.

      Your Right to move freely Ends where it endangers others, if that´s tyranny then not having the liberty to enslave others is also tyranny.

      1. “Feel Threatened”? Like the snowflakes in safe spaces that can’t bear to hear reason and evidence? So if I feel threatened by the Police (which I can at least raise a fair argument), the Police have no right to be around me, much less with weapons. It’s not reason, it’s feelings that must governed?

        Your fear is not sufficient to lock me up. We seem to be really bothered about due process in “red flag laws” where someone is afraid that someone will use a gun, but with ZERO evidence, and even less due process, you would place me under house arrest?

        That paranoids live in perpetual fear, so they wish to use the government to suppress everything, I guess everyone is an Obsessive Compulsive now, they have the “liberty to enslave others”? Enslaving others is tyranny, but that is what you advocate.
        Apparently I now live in the Union of Soviet Socialist Redoubts.

        1. Somehow you seemed to not to read the word reason

          Put it in other words, if you threaten me, i will not wait till you hit me, i will defend myself and after that, i will press charges for assault and compensation

          I do not lock you up nor do i want to, but if yoe endanger, threaten other People on life and Health for no ethical reason what are you then?

          1. So if you are walking along the street and an 8 year old is sneezing and coming your way you think you are free to shoot them?

            So if someone open carries, and I feel threatened by the mere presence of a gun, I don’t know if it is loaded, I can kill them first? I can’t read their mind no more than I can know if someone is infectious unless they show symptoms or has been tested. They may have recovered and are immune and NOT infectious.

            What you are saying is that without any knowledge of my status, if I simply walk outside, or get in my truck and drive around even distancing myself (I never said I would get within 6 feet of anyone without their consent), you will “defend yourself”.

            You have not given a single bit of evidence I am a threat. You have given me evidence you are paranoid and dangerous. Does [Germany] have “red flag laws”?

            Maybe you are a witch. I feel threatened. Should I have to prove you are a witch in any way – wait until you put a hex on me? I should defend myself and after that press charges…

            If a “reasonable person” would feel threatened, perhaps, but in an age where reason has been abandoned, and people consider “microaggressions” as threats, we ought not have a standard where the most paranoid and irrational defines what “threatened” means.

          2. I feel threatened if someone would carry a gun or drive a car if they ´ven´t the character, personality and skill to do so safely and with respnsibilty.

            What you said was, that if you got quarantined you would ignore that .
            I was going Shopping grocerys this morning and the majority of the People tried to hold safe distance but things do happen, go around a Corner and there is someone.

            If somebody swings his fist at your nose, would you wait till it´s stops at your nose or not before you try to defend yourself, i would.

    2. I’d say tz is mostly addressing “fake security”, as in TSA. And, tz, you are perfectly within your rights to practice some civil disobedience by leaving your home, maybe even inviting attention. This tactic is not just for lefties. They have just gotten most of the press for using it.

      Carry on, in grace

      1. In all cases it is a prudential judgment. Even to concealed or open carry, display a flag, or doing something else.

        Liberty is irrelevant if it is never to be exercised. If I wished to live in fear and avoid any conflict I could have stayed in one of the deep blue areas.

        Live free or die won’t work if you don’t really life free. You are already dead, in your coffin. It may be a comfortable living death, but it is still death.

        We have already retreated to the redoubts because people refused to draw lines for the last few decades as each liberty was destroyed, the police given more power (but they will only go after bad people, won’t they? We are now the “bad people”), and now it is demonitization and deplatforming.

        Right now there is no “shelter at home” requirement here, but what about the shut down businesses that will go bankrupt? Are you going to cheer that more people die of suicide and drug overdoses than the corona virus? At what point after the coal mines have shut, and an Indian H1-B has taken your job and now your small business is ruined do you just give into despair? And when you have nothing else to lose, that is really dangerous.

      2. Sorry, but his civil disobedience would threaten others directly and indirectly and in Italy About 700 People died today, in my hometown 3 cases are known and somebody tells it is his Right to went out and infect others

        1. Going outside in defiance of a lockdown order threatens others only under certain circumstances. Those who have practiced civil disobedience have been accused of “threatening others” for centuries.

          There is a vast chasm between exercising a right and infecting others. Each of us will have some difficult choices to make in the next little while.

          Carry on, in grace

        2. In Italy the average age of the dead is 81. Tragic but not surprising, and the way they counted it is if you had a heart attack while testing positive, it is a “coronavirus death”.

          It IS serious.

          Consider there are people who are deathly allergic to peanuts. If a single peanut falls into a pot of chili they will die. Shall we ban peanuts? Many are similarly allergic to bee stings. Shall we ban “hobby apiaries”?

          Or should we find a way to keep the vulnerable away from the threat?

          1. In Italy People are dying because they don´t´ve enough Intensiv care Equipment to try to save them.
            They do Triage there.

            Is 81 the age a person´s Right to life is exterminated or your responsibility Ends if you endanger their life?

  2. If someone is 81, and is in a crowded public place, why would you assume I was the source of infection? My Father at 83 was very healthy, my mother, a few years younger was frail. My dad died first. He got pneumonia, was recovering, and had a heart attack. 3 weeks earlier he was changing the brakes on his minivan.

    When are the bumbling Bush brothers, plus the judge going to be executed for the murder of Terri Schivao? What “right to life”.

    More babies are going to die in abortion clinics this year than adults from coronavirus. But do you even consider 60 million dead babies?

    I wish everyone to live, but that means living life to the fullest you desire.

    Right now, Planned Parenthood is murdering babies arguing they are an “essential service”.

    1. Because you were there Breaking quarantine, i see no difference between this and threatenening others life and health intentionally with a car or gun.

      Who´s Terry Schivao, why should it matter or since when make two crimes a Right?

      The Right to live our lifes to our fullest desire is not possible without breaking the bonds of Duty, responsibility and others Rights.

      1. So you are saying if I get into my car 500 miles away from you, and/or carry my gun, I’m threatening you?

        A Quarantine REQUIRES some kind of due process that I have some likelihood of spreading disease.

        You are saying absent ANY EVIDENCE I can be infectious, I’m a threat if I defy an unlawful seizure without due process?

        You are also indirectly arguing that the mere ownership of a gun (whether you are carrying it or not) can threaten others. Similarly with driving a car when you are capable and sober.

        The US Constitution and Natural Law and Reason says it cannot be the least common denominator of the most paranoid who feels threatened to define when you can USE VIOLENCE PROACTIVELY.

        1. No, I´´m saying that if you don´t ´ve the character, personality and skill to do this in a responsible matter you threaten or endanger others!

          I´m saying if you´re quarantined, then it is a a reasonable suspicion that you could be infected, contact with an infected Person for example and therefore could endanger others.

          In Italy the medical staff is literally expecting to be dying on their stations if Nothing changes, fast!

          I absolutly think the Right to life of the helpers trumps your Right to endanger them and others.

          “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”. IIRC John Adams

          btw Consult a map the distance between the US and Germany is a Little bit more than 500 miles

  3. The root of this was a general order to quarantine everyone, not having someone who has shown symptoms, been in contact with a known case, or tested positive.

    If there has been proper due process and sufficient evidence someone is dangerous, then you have a point, but not a general order for everyone to stay indoors unless they get a permission slip, hence my comparison to gun seizures.

    Strange, if someone has severe symptoms they are told to go to a Hospital where they WILL interact and get near health care workers and other sick patients including those vulnerable to infections. The single measles death in the last two decades was transmitted in a Doctor’s office. You generally don’t get MRSA except in medical facilities.

    Spare me ANY “Right to Life” arguments. They have been buried under the 60 million murdered babies – Abortion Clinics are trying to argue they are essential services. If we have left the death chambers open for the last 5 decades, why are you bothered about two orders of magnitude less deaths now?

    If anyone really believed in the right to life or even defending innocent lives, there would be no baby killing clinics, even if from civil disobedience.

    1. This order has given where and with which reasons?

      Proper procedure, what is that ?

      Okay, so you´re saying i endangered or killed only a few People, that is okay, ethical not a crime?

  4. So an arbitrary, unconstitutional and unlawful order has been given following no process and procedure, perhaps out of a power grab or paranoia (like “red flag laws” for guns) so you never endangered, much less killed anyone, is it ethical to imprison you?

Comments are closed.