The psychology of evil.
www.ted.com/talks/philip_zimbardo_on_the_psychology_of_evil.html
I see what you're saying, but do you honestly think your government has your best interest in mind? It very well may not be involved in the mass corrupt power takeover that our government is. It's very obvious here when whoever gets in power here forgets everything we voted him/her in to do and it's corrupt politics as usual.
Well Spud, if you believe the government's corrupt and the holocaust could happen there, why don't you own guns? And why did you think guns cause the loss of freedom?
Maybe you may mean because bad people will have more guns and that will make us less free?
They (drug dealers and "terrorists") already have tons of guns, supplied by the American government most of the time, so the goal is to keep our right to own guns, because they're trying to take it away from us.
I understand the worries of guns and kids, etc. but not having them seems a bigger worry here now in this theater. What are the other means of protection you use?
Here in the USA our federal government has already done more than enough for us to overtake it. If we got lawyers to charge them with treason, murder, gang related crimes, theft and selling out our country (and judges who couldn't be bought) they would all be in prison, but first I think the states are going to have to stand up against them, so guns in the hands of citizens is going to be very important.
This is only a game to me, but I want to play by the rules, and with all the tools available. What we think creates our "reality" and reality is relative. Dying is just waking up so I'm not worried about going all the way in this game, or laying around doing nothing, seemingly in denial, while Rome burns. It's all part of the dream. It's all good.
The government may be corrupt, but it is not in the governments interest to kill it citizens. Even if it was, the government have access to far more effective weapons than guns, for killing people en masse, so owning a gun would be pretty pointless against a government that could just bomb you out of existance if that was their want.
You must of been very stoned in the 60s and 70s and missed the VietNam war Spuds. JUst to bring you up to speed the NorthVietnames armed mainly with a somewhat crude AK-47 rifle beat the worlds greatest superpower in only 10 years. Your government doesnt have to bomb you if they can simply brainwash you into thinking they would.
And they have apparently done just that.
People tend to forget that the right to keep and bear arms was included in the Bill of Rights not for hunting, not for sport and not even for self protections from lawless individuals - but rather for protection from a tyrannical and lawless government that had become unresponsive to the needs and freedoms of the citizens.
Whether the bad guys be criminals or agents of a criminal government, they are much less likely to try to break in and subdue someone if they think that person has deadly force to resist with. True, that may not deter groups of agents as much when it comes to single individuals, but it surely would deter such force if there were several tens of millions of individuals thus protected and willing to fight for their lives and freedom.
True, guns may lead to an increase in violence and people always point to the US as an example. Yet, in addition to having always been armed we have also been a rowdier and less tamed country than those we are often compared to. Perhaps it is noteworthy that while we have become increasingly armed insofar as gun sales go over the past several years, our crime rate has actually gone down. During that same time, unarmed England, which is usually used as a comparison, has seen its crime rate increase.
Whether you like guns or not, the fact is that if the colonists had not had their guns there would never have been the Revolution and Declaration of Independence which founded our country. If we give up our guns today, the chances of another revolution will be slim and none no matter how desperately we may come to need one. I surely hope we don't have to have one, but I don't want to see that option that our forefathers clearly intended away either. Tyrants simply love a disarmed population of sheeple.
I am a peace loving and peaceful guy, I really am. But if someone or ones threaten my life and liberty or the life and liberty of those I love, I might just reach for a solution I can deliver at several hundred feet per second. I'm not that great a fighter in the first place and debates don't usually work when your opponent has deadly force and you are unarmed.