More on "Violent but Protective"
 
Back in June I wrote three pieces on the difference between violent and predatory, and violent but protective.  They were:
 
"(I)t's most important that all potential victims be as dangerous as they can",
 
Violence and the Social Contract, and
 
Governments, Criminals, and Dangerous Victims.
 
This topic has been a recurring theme of this blog, dating back to the beginning of it with Is the Government Responsible for Your Protection, parts I and II, and I've linked to other pieces on the topic as well, such as Eric S. Raymond's The Myth of Man the Killer, and others.
 
Well, here's another.  Back in Is the Government Responsible I quoted a friend of mine who once wrote:

The vast majority of people are good, decent "herbivores" who just wander around, harming nobody. Unfortunately, there are a small number of carnivores out there, who would prey upon the herbivores. The fact that some of the herbivores have the ability to defend themselves and others makes ALL herbivores safer, and only makes life appreciably more dangerous to the carnivores. I don't think there is a huge amount of violence out there....but there is SOME.
 
I don't carry guns so that I can shoot people, I carry a gun so that if somebody tries to do something violent or bad, I can put a stop to the violence. The idea is actually one of being able to bring to bear overwhelming force in the face of force, so that the first person doesn't try to use force in the first place.

Via Mostly Cajun I found a very interesting piece based precisely on this précis:
 
On Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs, by LTC Dave Grossman, USA (Ret.)
 
Excellent piece.  RTWT.