Two sides have differing opinions on a certain law, we will call it Law X. Without even knowing what Law X is, which side would you tend to agree with?
On one side, we have:
On the other side, we have:
Washington, Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison
Once you have made up your mind, I will tell you what "Law X" is below.
Law X is the opinion on how liberal gun ownership laws should be. All of the first choice clamped down greatly on guns and had very authoritarian laws regarding them. Hitler, for example, first took guns off the Jews, before as we all know, slaughtering them.
All of the latter believed in liberal gun laws.
If a tiny minority of people misuse their car and kill people, do you ban cars?
If a tiny minority of black people walk into a bar and kill people, do you ban all black people from bars?
If a tiny minority of factory owners pollute the water and kill people, do you ban all factories?
If a tiny minority of handgun owners misuse their guns and kill people, do you ban all handguns?
If a tiny minority of aeroplanes suffer malfunctions and kill people, do you ban all aeroplanes?
If a tiny minority of Muslims are terrorists, do you imprison all Muslims?
The following support gun control:
"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed the subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty." -- Adolf Hitler (H.R. Trevor-Roper, Hitler's Table Talks 1941-1944)
"Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun. Safety locks? You'll pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll pull the trigger. We'll see who wins." -- Sammy "The Bull" Gravano, Mafia hit man
The following have endorsed gun ownership:
Gandhi: "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." -- Mahatma Gandhi (An Autobiography OR The story of my experiments with truth, by M.K. Gandhi, p.238)
Orwell: "That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." -- George Orwell, the author of Animal Farm and 1984, himself a socialist
Even the frikin' Dalai Lama, to an extent:
"If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." -- The Dalai Lama, (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times) speaking at the "Educating Heart Summit" in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at a classmate
"It is, of course, no coincidence that the right to have guns is one of the earlier freedoms outlined in U.S.A.'s Bill of Rights. Without guns in the hands of the people, all the other freedoms are easily negated by the State. If you disagree with that statement, ask yourself if the Nazis could have gassed millions of Jews, had the Jews been armed with rifles and pistols--there weren't enough SS troops to do the job. Lest we forget, in the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising of 1944, a couple of hundred Jews armed with rifles and homemade explosive devices held off two fully-equipped German divisions (actually about 8,000 men) for nearly two months.
Closer home take the case of the Godhra carnage and the anti-Sikh riots of 1984. Would wanton mobs have slaughtered so many innocent people with such disregard to consequences if their potential victims had been armed and ready to defend themselves? A serious consideration should be given to an armed civilian population as a solution to religious and racial riots as well as other crimes. Since all criminals are instinctively driven by self-preservation allowing legal ownership of firearms by law abiding citizens would act as a serious deterrent. This will make sure that if the Govt. fails to do its duty to protect the life and liberty of its citizens (as it has so often done in India's recent past), citizens will be able to protect themselves."
If a 60 year old chap has a huge enthusiasm for handguns and wants a collection, he cannot because of authoritarians such as yourself.
If a young immgrant to the country participated in e.g. handgun shooting for a sport back home, he cannot because of authoritarians such as yourself.
If a young woman wants a handgun on her possession as she feels safer with it (even if that feeling is incorrect, it is what she feels), she cannot because of authoritarians such as yourself.
If a person like me wants a handgun to shoot targets on private property and never to have it leave the private property, I cannot because of authoritarians such as yourself.
If a survivalist wants a handgun for his survival kit - which is a highly recommended item to have amongst the survivalist community, s/he cannot because of authoritarians such as yourself.
If a Muslim woman wants a handgun because her religion encourages holding weaponry, she cannot because of authoritarians such as yourself.
Hoplophobia has been pushed into the skulls of the masses so they simply scream no every time the subject is brought up, and so what a neutral party would see as extremely totalitarian and authoritarian, you simply see as the norm. Think 1984.
Gun laws have increasingly became more authoritarian and extreme. If we lived in a society with no gun control at all, and the current laws were proposed, the proposers would simply be laughed at for their bigotry and intolerance.
And yet, we live in such an authoritarian, Hitler-esque Europe, but nobody ever questions it. Sheep
A quick thought experiment regarding the law [Everyone can play!] watch
- Thread Starter
Last edited by Selkarn; 09-04-2011 at 18:32.
- 09-04-2011 16:04