SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - View Single Post - NO! Victory of the civil society over the Totalitarian State

jason10mm · 10-27-05, 08:42 AM

The lack of firearms isn't bad until you NEED them, or if you have others providing for your defense. Just ask your neighbors to the South (Finland, for those far from Northern Europe

about their feelings for firearms ownership, particularly those around in the first half of the 20th century.

I think the main point of pro-second amendment/pro-firearms is that your government SHOULD TRUST the law abiding citizens (or subjects, as the case may be). Part of that trust is recognizing the basic human right to self-defense. Firearms are a fundamental component to self-defense. Not tanks, thermonuclear weapons, or anthrax spores, all of which are beyond any rational concept of self-defense (but commonly bandied about as the inevitable outcome of no "gun control" by the leftists).

If a government can not trust it's population, perhaps that means that the government no longer adequately represents its people. In Democracies, this means that a new government will soon be in power, but if the government becomes oppressive then it will ignore the will of the people. The ability to defend oneself can then easily become the ability to overthrow an oppressive government. But if you have no ability to defend oneself (no guns), then you have no ability to free yourself of an oppressive government. Trying to "get" guns after the fact is a long hard struggle, just as the Pols in Warsaw, circa 1944.

The only faction of a population who will abide by gun control laws are the LAW ABIDING! Criminals, by their very nature, BREAK laws! So gun control laws only restrict the most upstanding and honorable members of a society, while allowing the outlaw element free reign since they ignore laws by default.

So it is really pretty simple

Free access to firearms in a society means that the government is held in check by the people and criminals have to fear for their lives. No guns means the government can do whatever it wants and armed criminals can break into homes without fear.

10-27-05, 08:42 AM	#10
jason10mm Sailor man Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: San Antonio Posts: 48 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	The lack of firearms isn't bad until you NEED them, or if you have others providing for your defense. Just ask your neighbors to the South (Finland, for those far from Northern Europe about their feelings for firearms ownership, particularly those around in the first half of the 20th century. I think the main point of pro-second amendment/pro-firearms is that your government SHOULD TRUST the law abiding citizens (or subjects, as the case may be). Part of that trust is recognizing the basic human right to self-defense. Firearms are a fundamental component to self-defense. Not tanks, thermonuclear weapons, or anthrax spores, all of which are beyond any rational concept of self-defense (but commonly bandied about as the inevitable outcome of no "gun control" by the leftists). If a government can not trust it's population, perhaps that means that the government no longer adequately represents its people. In Democracies, this means that a new government will soon be in power, but if the government becomes oppressive then it will ignore the will of the people. The ability to defend oneself can then easily become the ability to overthrow an oppressive government. But if you have no ability to defend oneself (no guns), then you have no ability to free yourself of an oppressive government. Trying to "get" guns after the fact is a long hard struggle, just as the Pols in Warsaw, circa 1944. The only faction of a population who will abide by gun control laws are the LAW ABIDING! Criminals, by their very nature, BREAK laws! So gun control laws only restrict the most upstanding and honorable members of a society, while allowing the outlaw element free reign since they ignore laws by default. So it is really pretty simple Free access to firearms in a society means that the government is held in check by the people and criminals have to fear for their lives. No guns means the government can do whatever it wants and armed criminals can break into homes without fear.