Ron Paul: Seeking Total Security Leads to a Totalitarian Society

by Ron Paul

The senseless and horrific killings last week in Newtown, Connecticut reminded us that a determined individual or group of individuals can cause great harm no matter what laws are in place.  Connecticut already has restrictive gun laws relative to other states, including restrictions on fully automatic, so-called “assault” rifles and gun-free zones.

Predictably, the political left responded to the tragedy with emotional calls for increased gun control.  This is understandable, but misguided. The impulse to have government “do something” to protect us in the wake national tragedies is reflexive and often well intentioned.  Many Americans believe that if we simply pass the right laws, future horrors like the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting can be prevented.  But this impulse ignores the self evident truth that criminals don’t obey laws.

The political right, unfortunately, has fallen into the same trap in its calls for quick legislative solutions to gun violence.  If only we put armed police or armed teachers in schools, we’re told, would-be school shooters will be dissuaded or stopped.

While I certainly agree that more guns equals less crime and that private gun ownership prevents many shootings, I don’t agree that conservatives and libertarians should view government legislation, especially at the federal level, as the solution to violence.  Real change can happen only when we commit ourselves to rebuilding civil society in America, meaning a society based on family, religion, civic and social institutions, and peaceful cooperation through markets.  We cannot reverse decades of moral and intellectual decline by snapping our fingers and passing laws.

Let’s not forget that our own government policies often undermine civil society, cheapen life, and encourage immorality.  The president and other government officials denounce school violence, yet still advocate for endless undeclared wars abroad and easy abortion at home.  U.S. drone strikes kill thousands, but nobody in America holds vigils or devotes much news coverage to those victims, many of which are children, albeit, of a different color.

Obviously I don’t want to conflate complex issues of foreign policy and war with the Sandy Hook shooting, but it is important to make the broader point that our federal government has zero moral authority to legislate against violence.

Furthermore, do we really want to live in a world of police checkpoints, surveillance cameras, metal detectors, X-ray scanners, and warrantless physical searches?  We see this culture in our airports: witness the shabby spectacle of once proud, happy Americans shuffling through long lines while uniformed TSA agents bark orders.  This is the world of government provided “security,” a world far too many Americans now seem to accept or even endorse.  School shootings, no matter how horrific, do not justify creating an Orwellian surveillance state in America.

Do we really believe government can provide total security?  Do we want to involuntarily commit every disaffected, disturbed, or alienated person who fantasizes about violence?  Or can we accept that liberty is more important than the illusion of state-provided security? Government cannot create a world without risks, nor would we really wish to live in such a fictional place.  Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives.  We shouldn’t settle for substituting one type of violence for another. Government role is to protect liberty, not to pursue unobtainable safety.

Our freedoms as Americans preceded gun control laws, the TSA, or the Department of Homeland Security.  Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens to live without government interference, not by safety. It is easy to clamor for government security when terrible things happen; but liberty is given true meaning when we support it without exception, and we will be safer for it.


  • Guns are simply just tools, killing 26 people with my fists would make me a pyschopath. Therefore, it is people that kill. Taking guns away from people who adhere to moral principles in society won’t reduce gun crimes. Your logic is preposterous… Someone can buy an automobile and run over men, women, and children easily but does that mean we should put a ban on automobiles? Also, think about why the second ammendment was put in place.

  • French Canadian

    Ron Paul On The Fiscal Cliff: “We Have Passed The Point Of No Return”

  • oh yes..its mere coincedence that those Swiss just happen to have lower crime rates LOLOL. come on man, please.

  • ty. ditto.

  • I completely agree.Those are great points.

  • well said, but they also ignore this. Japan and Britain are islands…its much easier to ban guns when you have to fly them in or boat them in ilegally. we have an extensive ever evolving North and South American underground black market that cannot be quelled short of all government disarming themselves as well. even then it might be impossible to locate all production factories and underground networks…pandoras box was opened long ago. Like the Dr. says: only love and reason will heal this

  • Except they don’t dumb ass.

  • population density

  • population density

  • EPIC FISCAL CLIFF ANALYSIS —————> watch?v=r2tqx3vgi2E

  • this guy was our only hope for a political solution and he was roundly dissed and dismissed by the fascist republicans. and they are still wondering why they lost. liberty? constitution? self reliance? he must have made up words that no longer exist.

  • Surfisher

    A government that does not trust all lawful Citizens to own and bear arms (guns) is a government NOT to be trusted!


  • French Canadian

    Important, crucial interview. PLEASE WATCH!

    Alex talks with Doug Hagmann of the Northeast Intelligence Network about information released by his high-level DHS contact concerning government gun confiscation and other important topics.

    Insider: Obama To Fully Engage Gun Owners with Armed Feds in 2013

  • obama / hitler have the same agenda disarm the public, Then march the people into the death / fema camps. This is how hitler did it… There is a reason our Forefathers warned us to bear arms, because of out of control governments like our is Today. Protect your Loved ones and your Property.

  • And the pussy bitch ass networks funded by the banks said this guy was crazy?!?! I was hoping to God Alighty that the Ron would of won president.. he would of shaped this country back to a free society.. but no.. people like feeling brainwashed to think the government would “protect” us.. stupid sheep of America..

  • School killings in the United States are not a new phenomenon 1927 in Bath Michigan dynamite was used and still is the number 1 mass killing in the U.S. with this known why then does the Congress, Senate and President enjoy heavy security while experimenting with our children with pie in the sky gun free zones around schools? The answer is they know eventually a gunman will engage unprotected civilians giving those politicians a chance to capitalize on the issue removing our beloved freedoms!

  • Check out “The Nixon Tapes: Jew Spies” before youtube removes it again. Or reloads a twisted version which CBS tried to do. Ceck it out. Super interesting. Seems the Jews had him pretty paranoid…..

  • French Canadian


    Take a look at this article and especially to the 48 comments. Lots of information there,

    UPDATE: Was the Sandy Hook Massacre A False Flag Operation? Early Eyewitness Reports From Newton, CT Suggest So

  • touché douche

  • touché douche