Let us skip, for the moment, long arguments about what form of government is best, and consider Robert Anson Heinlein's assertion (via Lazarus Long) that democracy is doomed to fail once its citizens realize they have the power to vote themselves bread and circuses, and that possibly the best and most stable form of government is a benevolent dictatorship.
I will emphasize at this point that this is not a debate on whether he was right. If you disagree with the assertion, feel free to skip the discussion entirely if you wish, but please don't diverge into arguments about why it's wrong.
The point here is quite simple: Assume for the moment that Heinlein's, or Long's, assertion is correct. That stipulated, and under that condition, what I solicit is your opinion as to who might make a good Supreme Leader, and more importantly, why.
Conditions:
- Your candidate may not be fictional.
- Your candidate must be currently alive.
- Your candidate need not be a current public figure.
Beyond those ground rules, it's wide open. Go for it.
no subject
That didn't prohibit a nutcase from committing suicide-by-cop last spring, in the street a hundred yards from our rear window. Even if the fellow had run from the police officer into our back yard, instead of brandishing his BB gun and threatening him, it would not have made sense for
Heck, even if someone were to break into our home at night, would
The problem is that good citizens don't start trouble, they don't shoot first, and they don't act crazy. Therefore they will always be at a disadvantage, armed or not, when confronting bad citizens.
no subject
Nor would I expect it to. Ultimately, you cannot prevent suicide. Someone who really wants to die can ALWAYS find a way. I submit that the best way to handle the problem is to not try so hard to prevent it that would-be suicides resort to means that take five or ten or fifty people with them. But then, I have a personal conviction that any right to life is hollow without a right to terminate that life when you see fit.
As a counter-example, I submit the occasion when
I venture to suggest that this illustrates the folly of keeping a weapon in the house stored in such a way that you can't get to it in time if you need it. In your scenario, I can have the .45 in the lockbox bolted into my headboard in my hand and ready to fire in three seconds.
If you keep a firearm stored unloaded and so inaccessible you can't get to it in time to use it, and yet store it unlocked, all you're doing is providing a free weapon to the first burglar who breaks in when you're out and tosses the place.
no subject
no subject
no subject
Where do you get such a thing?
(take 2, corrected)
no subject