CHAPTER XX — ARE FORTRESSES, AND MANY OTHER THINGS TO WHICH PRINCES OFTEN RESORT, ADVANTAGEOUS OR HURTFUL?
1. Some princes, so as to hold securely the state, have disarmed their subjects… (A)lthough one cannot give a final judgment on all of these things unless one possesses the particulars of those states in which a decision has to be made, nevertheless I will speak as comprehensively as the matter of itself will admit.
2. There never was a new prince who has disarmed his subjects; rather when he has found them disarmed he has always armed them, because, by arming them, those arms become yours, those men who were distrusted become faithful, and those who were faithful are kept so, and your subjects become your adherents. And whereas all subjects cannot be armed, yet when those whom you do arm are benefited, the others can be handled more freely, and this difference in their treatment, which they quite understand, makes the former your dependents, and the latter, considering it to be necessary that those who have the most danger and service should have the most reward, excuse you. But when you disarm them, you at once offend them by showing that you distrust them, either for cowardice or for want of loyalty, and either of these opinions breeds hatred against you.
… Therefore, as I have said, a new prince in a new principality has always distributed arms. Histories are full of examples.http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1232/1232-h/1232-h.htm#link2HCH0020"And whereas all subjects cannot be armed…"
Here I insert the Mandatory Exemptions.
"(T)his difference in their treatment, which they quite understand…"
Yes, even violent psychopaths understand WHY they are treated differently.
"But when you disarm them, you at once offend them by showing that you distrust them, either for cowardice or for want of loyalty, and either of these opinions breeds hatred against you."
This was Barack's mistake; He offended all, even those who supported him, "either for cowardice or want of loyalty," for even the lowliest of his supporters know the police can not be everywhere at all times, and criminals can appear anywhere, at any time- Indeed the lowliest know this most painfully, being the most common prey. Common burglars rarely target the homes of the wealthiest, finding it far easier to invade the slums to steal enough for one more hit; Drug lords rarely feel the sting of robbery, for those who would do so know that the dealers have guns and will retaliate soon enough.
Gun control does not work- It only hurts the poor. MACHIAVELLI'S adminision, "when he has found them disarmed he has always armed them," is as true now as then, and for the same reason, "by arming them, those arms become yours, those men who were distrusted become faithful, and those who were faithful are kept so, and your subjects become your adherents." Those who are armed and enabled in their own defence do not forget easily by WHOM they were benefited; And though they may not particularly LIKE the message being given a gun registered in their name (and thus being their responsibility to maintain and properly carry) sends, it does give them one comfort- That should it come to pass that they do need it, they will not have to wait for the police to draw a chalk outline only for themselves.