still so largely those of individuals under the conditions of frontier
life, as with the honest man on the frontier, so for the
self-respecting, peace-loving nation to-day, it is well to carry a gun
and know how to shoot.

Carrying a gun is a dangerous practice, for two reasons: it may go off
in your pocket; you may get drunk and shoot when you ought not. Those
are the only two rational arguments against national preparation for
defense, in the present state of the world. Let us see. The gun may go
off in your pocket: that is, if a strong armament for defense is built
up, there is always danger that it may be used internally, against the
people, unjustly. That, indeed, has been one of the curses of Europe
for a thousand years. It is a grave danger, but recognizing it is partly
forestalling it; moreover, we would better face that danger than one far
worse. So with the other menace: you may get drunk and shoot when you
ought not. Nations get drunk: they get drunk with pride, arrogance,
aggressive ambition, revenge, even with panic terror, and so shoot when
they should not. This, also, is a grave danger; but here, as well,
recognizing it is part way forestalling it, and this danger, too, we
would better face than one far more terrible. Moreover, it is armament
for the gratification of aggressive ambition, and under the control of
the arbitrary authority of a despotic individual or group, that tends to
initiate war, not armament solely to defend the liberties of a people.

Thus, under the conditions cited, it is well to be armed and prepared.
If a wolf is at large, if a mad dog is loose, if a madman is abroad with
an ax, it is the part of wisdom to have an adequate weapon and be
prepared to use it. If the Athenians had not resisted the hordes of
Asia, what would have been the history of Europe? If the French had not
resisted tyranny and injustice in the Revolution, what would have been