*Zaccheus* on 18/4/2007 at 20:04
I still do not understand how people can seriously think that owning hand guns is a viable defence against a dictatorship in the US.
Mortal Monkey on 18/4/2007 at 20:08
How amusing that you keep guns in case the government goes apeshit, yet think it's completely reasonable for people enlisting in the military to swear an oath to always do as the government's says. Now I see where you got that MAD doctrine from.
*Zaccheus* on 18/4/2007 at 20:14
Just out of interest, how many US soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are being killed by the kinds of house-hold weapons we are talking about here ?
Gingerbread Man on 18/4/2007 at 20:19
Just out of interest, mind you. Certainly not to belabor an already-made and staggeringly superficial talking-point.
Honestly, just out of interest.
*Zaccheus* on 18/4/2007 at 20:31
Taffer_Boy_Elvis brought up Iraq.
I'd like to know how effective house-hold guns have been against the US Army, because as far as I can tell, it's the roadside bombs that have had the most impact.
Stitch on 18/4/2007 at 20:39
Well that certainly applies to this discussion.
scumble on 18/4/2007 at 20:40
Quote Posted by Stitch
Having said that, I'm not for banning guns or anything, but I do think we should be honest about why we want guns as opposed to flinging around this greater-good-against-an-evil-government horseshit.
In the 1770s it probably seemed sensible when there was no police force as such and a tiny standing army.
In the context we're talking of I tend to agree that the "defense against tyranny" is indeed a bit of an abstract idea as you say. The comparison I have in my mind is that in the UK most people haven't even known someone with a handgun for a very long time, and in some respects the government here isn't as oppressive as the US. In fact the nationalist NRA types who would trot out this "guns against the state" theory are more likely to be cheering on the current US administration it appears.
Violent revolution isn't the only way a government can radically alter in any case. The authority of rulers can always dissolve if enough people simply refuse to recognise that authority and establish something else in its place.
*Zaccheus* on 18/4/2007 at 20:43
Actually the police are an important factor in all this. Each US state does have a group of people who are independent of the military, not directly accountable to the central government, and trained in the use of fire-arms.
steo on 18/4/2007 at 20:48
So there really isn't any good reason why Mr Average Joe needs a gun.
Dia on 18/4/2007 at 22:06
At the risk of derailing this lively discourse on gun control, I just read something that absolutely chilled me to the bone. Looks like all will be explained (if there is any sane explanation to be had here) very soon. It also explains where Cho went for at least part of the two hours between shootings.
(
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070418/ap_on_re_us/virginia_tech_shooting)
I'm still trying to wrap my brain around what happened. And I'm still horror-struck.
