The right to bear arms

[TheoK]

They have no right to decide whatsoever from the very beginning. The people has never given a state any rights to begin with, like I said in the other thread. They invented "democracy" when they couldn't fool people with religion anymore. But they still got their power in a criminal way to start with, by taking it by force from the people.

Yes dear.

So it's not true? You mean that it actually happened once in a time that free people, who were their own masters, of their free will gave anyone else the right to rule over them?

[TheoK]

Yes, I can see why you'd think so, but my point is that the firearms owned by private citizens won't make much of a difference.

What kind of a scenario are you envisioning? What resources do you think would be more effective?

Bigger guns, basically.

That's why all guns should be available to anyone. Machine guns and bazookas are legal in many states in the US but tanks and missilles should of course also be available.

[odeon]

Yes, I can see why you'd think so, but my point is that the firearms owned by private citizens won't make much of a difference.

What kind of a scenario are you envisioning? What resources do you think would be more effective?

Bigger guns, basically.

That's why all guns should be available to anyone. Machine guns and bazookas are legal in many states in the US but tanks and missilles should of course also be available.

Er, no. With lunatics like you running around, no way.

[TheoK]

In Europe it's extremely different to make people understand that they might have to fight their governments, at least in countries that were never occupied by the commies.

... or subjects of a deified royal, crowned tyrant of some sort. Remember that the people who live there in this day and age are mostly descended from loyal subjects who chose to stay while all those hopeful ships were sailing to populate the free lands of the New World.



(... or missed the boat.)
 

The people in southern and eastern Europe know what freedom is. The irony is that the people in northern and western Europe, that never was occupied by the commies don't know what freedom is. You'll find most illegal guns=brave in southern and eastern Europe.

[odeon]

Yes dear.

[TheoK]

Yes, I can see why you'd think so, but my point is that the firearms owned by private citizens won't make much of a difference.

What kind of a scenario are you envisioning? What resources do you think would be more effective?

Bigger guns, basically.

That's why all guns should be available to anyone. Machine guns and bazookas are legal in many states in the US but tanks and missilles should of course also be available.

Er, no. With lunatics like you running around, no way.

No, it's better that they belong to sound people like Saddam or the "Palestines" or the president of Iran.

[RageBeoulve]

I very much doubt you could do much if the state decided to change the rules,

That thinking is a sure recipe for failure. If the state changes the rules without asking the people, it's the people's goddamn right to attack the state.

Always the fanatic, you, which is why most people dismiss your opinions directly. If you'd been prepared to consider other viewpoints than your own we might have had the discussion Rage sees.

Learn from Rage. He is, as you say, brave.

Well. I just consider that other people just might know something I don't, but I voice my opinion. My opinion was formed from a difficult string of past events, but I keep an open mind and consider the fact that billions upon billions of people also have alternate experiences.

I do think you underestimate america's potential for militias though odeon. There are private organizations which hold very large weapons caches, and you have prior sevice men like myself which have been trained to fight previously. Militia might not win against the government, but I think they probably want to avoid such a difficult and bloody conflict. It would not be pleasant.

True, it wouldn't. But what makes you think they wouldn't do it?

To be frank, expenses. They would lose worker-drones, on top of also having to pay for lots of other things. Nobody wants that.

[punkdrew]

I think they would. Waco, Ruby Ridge and other such incidents seem like training exercises in a way. And most people will still do what they're told even in an economic depression. It's the rare individual who says "Wait a minute--this doesn't smell right to me."

"...in contemporary Western society the union with the group is the prevalent way of overcoming separateness. It is a union in which the individual self disappears to a large extent, and where the aim is to belong to the herd.  If I am like everyone else, I lhave no feelings or thoughts which make me different; if I conform in customs, dress, and ideas to the pattern of the group, I am saved; saved from the frightening experience of aloneness.  The dictatorial systems use threats and terror to induce this conformity; the democratic countries, suggestion and propaganda. There is...one great difference between the two systems.  In the democracies non-conformity is possible  and, in fact, by no means totally absent; in the totalitarian systems, only a few unusual heroes and martyrs can be expected to refuse obedience.  But in spite of this difference the democratic societies show an overwhelming degree of conformity.  The reason lies in the fact that there *has* to be an answer to the quest for union, and if there is no other or better way, then the union of herd conformity becomes the predominant one. One can only understand the power of the fear to be different, the fear to be only a few steps away from the herd, if one understands the depths of the need not to be separated. Sometimes this fear of non-conformity is rationalized as fear of practical dangers which could threaten the non-conformist. But actually, people *want* to conform to a much higher degree than they are *forced* to conform, at least in the Western democracies."--Erich Fromm, THE ART OF LOVING 

yay 900!!!

[TheoK]

Fromm was an intelligent and BRAVE man.

And this is my point too, when I mock "democracy": it's actually a smarter way to make people obey than open and honest dictatorship. They can be part of the herd and convince themselves that conformity is "voluntarily". 

[odeon]

True, it wouldn't. But what makes you think they wouldn't do it?

To be frank, expenses. They would lose worker-drones, on top of also having to pay for lots of other things. Nobody wants that.

The cost might scare them, yes, but so far the Chinese are willing to lend the US more money.

[TheoK]

Private gun ownership is outlawed or very restricted in China (I haven't found anything about Chinese gun laws, but all commie dictatorships either have extreme restrictions or gun bans), and what do they have? Slavery.

[odeon]

Slavery or not, China's money is sorely needed.

[TheoK]

It's a disgrace that America needs money from a shit country like that. 

[odeon]

It's worrying. Some day China will want their money back.

[Parts]

It's worrying. Some day China will want their money back.

I worry about that too.  One of the reasons they shouldn't ban guns here