Excellent Argument Against Gun Control

[S.J.]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N47StpqUO2c]One of the best 7 minute speeches on gun control ever. - YouTube[/ame]

 

[tyroneweaver]

16 signs of a tyranny
1. Control of public information and opinion: It begins with withholding information, and leads to putting out false or misleading information. A government can develop ministries of propaganda under many guises. They typically call it "public information" or "marketing".
2. Vote fraud used to prevent the election of reformers: It doesn't matter which of the two major party candidates are elected if no real reformer can get nominated, and when news services start knowing the outcomes of elections before it is possible for them to know, then the votes are not being honestly counted.
3. Undue official influence on trials and juries: Nonrandom selection of jury panels, exclusion of those opposed to the law, exclusion of the jury from hearing argument on the law, exclusion of private prosecutors from access to the grand jury, and prevention of parties and their counsels from making effective arguments or challenging the government.
4. Usurpation of undelegated powers: This is usually done with popular support for solving some problem, or to redistribute wealth to the advantage of the supporters of the dominant faction, but it soon leads to the deprivation of rights of minorities and individuals.
5. Seeking a government monopoly on the capability and use of armed force: The first signs are efforts to register or restrict the possession and use of firearms, initially under the guise of "protecting" the public, which, when it actually results in increased crime, provides a basis for further disarmament efforts affecting more people and more weapons.
6. Militarization of law enforcement: Declaring a "war on crime" that becomes a war on civil liberties. Preparation of military forces for internal policing duties.
7. Infiltration and subversion of citizen groups that could be forces for reform: Internal spying and surveillance is the beginning. A sign is false prosecutions of their leaders.
8. Suppression of investigators and whistleblowers: When people who try to uncover high level wrongdoing are threatened, that is a sign the system is not only riddled with corruption, but that the corruption has passed the threshold into active tyranny.
9. Use of the law for competition suppression: It begins with the dominant faction winning support by paying off their supporters and suppressing their supporters' competitors, but leads to public officials themselves engaging in illegal activities and using the law to suppress independent competitors. A good example of this is narcotics trafficking.
10. Subversion of internal checks and balances: This involves the appointment to key positions of persons who can be controlled by their sponsors, and who are then induced to do illegal things. The worst way in which this occurs is in the appointment of judges that will go along with unconstitutional acts by the other branche
11. Creation of a class of officials who are above the law: This is indicated by dismissal of charges for wrongdoing against persons who are "following orders".
12. Increasing dependency of the people on government: The classic approach to domination of the people is to first take everything they have away from them, then make them compliant with the demands of the rulers to get anything back again.
13. Increasing public ignorance of their civic duties and reluctance to perform them: When the people avoid doing things like voting and serving in militias and juries, tyranny is not far behind.
14. Use of staged events to produce popular support: Acts of terrorism, blamed on political opponents, followed immediately with well-prepared proposals for increased powers and budgets for suppressive agencies. Sometimes called a Reichstag plot.
15. Conversion of rights into privileges: Requiring licenses and permits for doing things that the government does not have the delegated power to restrict, except by due process in which the burden of proof is on the petitioner.
16. Political correctness: Many if not most people are susceptible to being recruited to engage in repressive actions against disfavored views or behaviors, and led to pave the way for the dominance of tyrannical government.

 

[S.J.]

16 signs of a tyranny
1. Control of public information and opinion: It begins with withholding information, and leads to putting out false or misleading information. A government can develop ministries of propaganda under many guises. They typically call it "public information" or "marketing".
2. Vote fraud used to prevent the election of reformers: It doesn't matter which of the two major party candidates are elected if no real reformer can get nominated, and when news services start knowing the outcomes of elections before it is possible for them to know, then the votes are not being honestly counted.
3. Undue official influence on trials and juries: Nonrandom selection of jury panels, exclusion of those opposed to the law, exclusion of the jury from hearing argument on the law, exclusion of private prosecutors from access to the grand jury, and prevention of parties and their counsels from making effective arguments or challenging the government.
4. Usurpation of undelegated powers: This is usually done with popular support for solving some problem, or to redistribute wealth to the advantage of the supporters of the dominant faction, but it soon leads to the deprivation of rights of minorities and individuals.
5. Seeking a government monopoly on the capability and use of armed force: The first signs are efforts to register or restrict the possession and use of firearms, initially under the guise of "protecting" the public, which, when it actually results in increased crime, provides a basis for further disarmament efforts affecting more people and more weapons.
6. Militarization of law enforcement: Declaring a "war on crime" that becomes a war on civil liberties. Preparation of military forces for internal policing duties.
7. Infiltration and subversion of citizen groups that could be forces for reform: Internal spying and surveillance is the beginning. A sign is false prosecutions of their leaders.
8. Suppression of investigators and whistleblowers: When people who try to uncover high level wrongdoing are threatened, that is a sign the system is not only riddled with corruption, but that the corruption has passed the threshold into active tyranny.
9. Use of the law for competition suppression: It begins with the dominant faction winning support by paying off their supporters and suppressing their supporters' competitors, but leads to public officials themselves engaging in illegal activities and using the law to suppress independent competitors. A good example of this is narcotics trafficking.
10. Subversion of internal checks and balances: This involves the appointment to key positions of persons who can be controlled by their sponsors, and who are then induced to do illegal things. The worst way in which this occurs is in the appointment of judges that will go along with unconstitutional acts by the other branche
11. Creation of a class of officials who are above the law: This is indicated by dismissal of charges for wrongdoing against persons who are "following orders".
12. Increasing dependency of the people on government: The classic approach to domination of the people is to first take everything they have away from them, then make them compliant with the demands of the rulers to get anything back again.
13. Increasing public ignorance of their civic duties and reluctance to perform them: When the people avoid doing things like voting and serving in militias and juries, tyranny is not far behind.
14. Use of staged events to produce popular support: Acts of terrorism, blamed on political opponents, followed immediately with well-prepared proposals for increased powers and budgets for suppressive agencies. Sometimes called a Reichstag plot.
15. Conversion of rights into privileges: Requiring licenses and permits for doing things that the government does not have the delegated power to restrict, except by due process in which the burden of proof is on the petitioner.
16. Political correctness: Many if not most people are susceptible to being recruited to engage in repressive actions against disfavored views or behaviors, and led to pave the way for the dominance of tyrannical government.

And we're seeing every one of those things happening right now, under this communist president.

 

[DiamondDave]

crickets

 

[waltky]

Granny says, "Dat's right - dat's another case o' the gubmint's right hand not knowin' what the left hand is doin'...

Obama's Budget Asks $30 Million in New Funding for ‘Gun Violence Prevention’
April 11, 2013 - President Obama's Fiscal Year 2014 budget includes $30 million in new funding to "track gun violence" and to research strategies that might prevent it.

Of that new $30 million flowing to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, $10 million will support "gun violence prevention research" and $20 million will be spent on expansion of CDC's National Violent Death Reporting System. Here's what the CDC budget justification (page 233) says about the $10 million for new research into "gun violence":

In addition to the approximately 30,000 firearm-related homicides and suicides a year, more than 58,000 non-fatal firearm injuries from assault or self-harm are treated in hospital emergency departments annually. Together, each year they account for more than $35.3 billion in medical and lost productivity costs to the United States. The President’s plan, Now is the Time, calls for public health research on gun violence to give all Americans the information they need. To address the numerous gaps in the evidence base for firearm injury prevention, CDC will use $10 million to begin conducting research into the causes and prevention of gun violence.

These activities will be informed by a research agenda being developed in 2013 and will ensure that accurate and timely data are available to describe the characteristics of firearm violence, monitor firearm trends, and determine those gun violence prevention strategies likely to have the greatest public health impact. Gun violence prevention research will include study of the risk and protective factors associated with firearm injuries, the effectiveness of strategies to prevent gun violence, roles of violent video games and violent media content on behavior. CDC will make funds available to support research into the causes and prevention of gun violence through a competitive, peer-review process, funding approximately ten to fifteen grants and cooperative agreements for three to five years.

MORE

See also:

Bulletproof: $25 Million ‘Sitting in an Account at the Department of Justice’
April 11, 2013 – The Government Accountability Office says the Justice Department has accumulated $27 million in unused grant funds for its Bulletproof Vest Partnership program since the program launched 14 years ago. Only $2 million of those expired grant funds have been made available for other uses – leaving $25 million in taxpayer money sitting around.

GAO's David Maurer told a House Judiciary subcommittee on Wednesday that a 2012 GAO report found that DOJ “had not taken steps to de-obligate about $27 million in unused funds from grant awards that had expired.” When asked by CNSNews.com what happened to those funds -- which now total $25 million -- Maurer said the money is “sitting in an account at the Department of Justice.” Since Congress passed the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act of 1998, more than $340 million in grants have been awarded.

In fiscal year 2012, the bulletproof vest program received about $24 million – so de-obligating the remaining $25 million “could have significant benefits,” Maurer said. “For example, deobligating this funding could enable the department to apply the amounts to new awards or reduce requests for future budgets.” The 2012 GAO report urged DOJ to improve its resource management by “unobligating” expired grant funds that had been earmarked to pay for bulletproof vests and stab-resistant body armor for state and local law enforcement officers nationwide.

The DOJ has said it would “deobligate” the remaining $25 million in expired grants by the end of this month, according to the GAO findings Maurer include with his congressional testimony. “As the fiscal pressures facing the nation continue, it is increasingly important for DOJ and other executive branch agencies to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government programs,” Maurer told the panel, which called the hearing to address wasteful practices at DOJ.

President Obama’s FY 2014 budget, released Wednesday, requests $27.6 billion for the Justice Department, up from $27.1 billion in FY 2013 and $27 billion in FY 2012. “As in previous years, this budget incorporates department-wide savings and efficiencies, but the need for a balanced, bipartisan deficit reduction plan remains an urgent priority,” Attorney General Eric Holder said.

Source

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Facts are an excellent argument against gun control.

 

[Saigon]

under this communist president.

and you wonder why people aren't taking you seriously?

 

[Saigon]

Facts are an excellent argument against gun control.

Well, here are some facts:

The US has four times as many homicides as any other developed country.

The US has been ten and twenty times as many gun-related homicides as any other developed country.

Some 50,000 Americans were deliberately shot last year.

The UK now has its lowest homicide rate for 30 years. Australia's rate of suicide plumetted since instituting gun control.

In the US, 14,748 people were killed by guns last year. In France the number was 682. In Germany it was 690. In Spain it was 390.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Facts are an excellent argument against gun control.

Well, here are some facts:

The US has four times as many homicides as any other developed country.

The US has been ten and twenty times as many gun-related homicides as any other developed country.

Some 50,000 Americans were deliberately shot last year.

The UK now has its lowest homicide rate for 30 years. Australia's rate of suicide plumetted since instituting gun control.

In the US, 14,748 people were killed by guns last year. In France the number was 682. In Germany it was 690. In Spain it was 390.

Keep this in mind when Comparing the US to other countries.
You cannot compare the United States directly to any other country.

We have a reigning governmental structure known as FEDERALISM.

The laws and Constitution of each State is vastly DIFFERENT from the laws and Constitution of every other State.

Also, within each State, the laws of each city and town are moderately DIFFERENT from the laws of every other city and town.

Also, keep in mind, that many federal laws (that are govern the whole nation), are executed differently in different states, especially when significant devolution procedures have been written into that law.

Countries, like the UK, are UNITARY governments. The variance in local laws are microscopic in places like the UK. Moderate differences in law are only seen between rural and urban regions.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This means, when you compare the laws of a UNITARY government, to the laws of the United States, are you no better off comparing Apples to a Smorgasbord.

In order to compare a UNITARY government to the United States, you should only consider Cities and towns that are governed by the same or very similar laws. Sometimes you MIGHT be able to compare them to an entire State, however, you can NEVER compare them to the entire Union.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We also having a raging drug war (that should be legalized), remember that.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Since the UK and Chicago have similar gun laws, we can safely compare them.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

But hey, if you want to get into facts that can actually be applied:

DOJ Self Defense statistics

The Racist Roots of Gun Control.

Federalist 28 + Federalist 46 + Founding Father quotes.

Democide - Mao, Stalin, Hitler, etc.

------------------------------------------------------------

Ever got really fed up with the endless spin and bullshit that the gun grabbers throw at you? Here are three things you can show them and they can't even refute them, they just ignore them and continue spinning other subjects and details about gun control.

Democide, number one violent killer in human history: http://www.mega.nu/ampp/rummel/note5.htm

Department of Justice Statistics:

You are far more likely to survive
a violent assault if you defend yourself with a gun.

Resisting with a gun 6%
Did nothing at all 25%
Resisted with a knife 40%
Non-violent resistance 45%

U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Rape Victimization in 26 American Cities, 1979 60
Department of Justice's National Crime Victimization Survey 61
U.S. Department of Justice 62
U.S. Department of Justice 63
British Home Office – no a pro-gun organization by any mean

From these same studies.

Of the 2,500,000 annual self-defense cases using guns, more than 7.7% are by women
defending themselves against sexual abuse.
Fact:
When a woman was armed with a gun or knife, only 3% of the attempted rapes are
successful, compared to 32% when unarmed.

Fact:
The probability of serious injury from an attack is 2.5 times greater for women offering no
resistance than for women resisting with a gun. Men also benefit from using a gun, but the
benefits are smaller: offering no resistance is 1.4 times more likely to result in serious injury than
resisting with a gun.

Fact:
27% of women keep a gun in the house.

Fact:
37.6 million women either own or have rapid access to guns.

Fact:
In 1966 the city of Orlando responded to a wave of sexual assaults by offering firearms
training classes to women. The number of rapes dropped by nearly 90%.

Fact: The year 2000 DoJ study further proved that 550 rapes and 1200 murders are prevented every day by would-be victims simply showing a firearm.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/55878NCJRS.pdf

Racism and Democide and Gun Control:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yA4mJW-kjSc]NO GUNS FOR NEGROES 1of2 THE RACIST ROOTS OF GUN CONTROL - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwueChZUgf8]NO GUNS FOR NEGROES 2of2 THE RACIST ROOTS OF GUN CONTROL - YouTube[/ame]
The Secret History of Guns - Adam Winkler - The Atlantic
Democide: Number 1 VIOLENT killer in the past couple of centuries
Democide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Federalist 28:

If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair. The usurpers, clothed with the forms of legal authority, can too often crush the opposition in embryo. The smaller the extent of the territory, the more difficult will it be for the people to form a regular or systematic plan of opposition, and the more easy will it be to defeat their early efforts. Intelligence can be more speedily obtained of their preparations and movements, and the military force in the possession of the usurpers can be more rapidly directed against the part where the opposition has begun. In this situation there must be a peculiar coincidence of circumstances to insure success to the popular resistance.

The obstacles to usurpation and the facilities of resistance increase with the increased extent of the state, provided the citizens understand their rights and are disposed to defend them. The natural strength of the people in a large community, in proportion to the artificial strength of the government, is greater than in a small, and of course more competent to a struggle with the attempts of the government to establish a tyranny. But in a confederacy the people, without exaggeration, may be said to be entirely the masters of their own fate. Power being almost always the rival of power, the general government will at all times stand ready to check the usurpations of the state governments, and these will have the same disposition towards the general government. The people, by throwing themselves into either scale, will infallibly make it preponderate. If their rights are invaded by either, they can make use of the other as the instrument of redress. How wise will it be in them by cherishing the union to preserve to themselves an advantage which can never be too highly prized!

It may safely be received as an axiom in our political system, that the State governments will, in all possible contingencies, afford complete security against invasions of the public liberty by the national authority. Projects of usurpation cannot be masked under pretenses so likely to escape the penetration of select bodies of men, as of the people at large. The legislatures will have better means of information. They can discover the danger at a distance; and possessing all the organs of civil power, and the confidence of the people, they can at once adopt a regular plan of opposition, in which they can combine all the resources of the community. They can readily communicate with each other in the different States, and unite their common forces for the protection of their common liberty.

Federalist 46:

The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterrupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism.

Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops.

Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it.

Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it.

Founding Father quotes
GunCite: Second Amendment-Quotes from the Framers and their contemporaries

Read my sig, it's part of a project we're working on here on Long Island (our own quote).

-----------------------------------------
A Message to the Authoritarian Republic/Democrat One-Party System: If you want our weapons, come and get them.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTqVrNkr6ug]300 Come and Get Them - YouTube[/ame]

 

[TemplarKormac]

under this communist president.

and you wonder why people aren't taking you seriously?

You sir are just about as bad as Jake. If it walks like a duck... you know the rest.

Executive Order 13618

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-07-11/pdf/2012-17022.pdf

 

[Saigon]

Keep this in mind when Comparing the US to other countries.
You cannot compare the United States directly to any other country.

Of course you can, but facts simply are not on your side here.

In any like-on-like comparison of large, developed, western economies, US gun statistics are a humiliation and a disgrace. They are indefensible.

Hence, we see those opposing gun control dismiss them out of hand, which is extremely unfortunate.


Yes, I understand the situation in the US varies state to state. Australia and Malaysia also have federal systems, by the way. 229 Australians were killed by guns last year, and 604 Malaysians, at rates 80% and 60% lower than the US respectively.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

Keep this in mind when Comparing the US to other countries.
You cannot compare the United States directly to any other country.

Of course you can, but facts simply are not on your side here.

Hence, we see those opposing gun control dismiss them out of hand, which is extremely unfortunate.

Have you read post number 10?

 

[Saigon]

You are far more likely to survive
a violent assault if you defend yourself with a gun.

And yet research has also found that you are 4.5 times more likely to be shot during an assault if in possession of a weapon.

Results. After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (P < .05) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 (P < .05).

2009 university study: Gun owners 4.46 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. :: The Political CarnivalThe Political Carnival


And yes, I read post#10.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

You are far more likely to survive
a violent assault if you defend yourself with a gun.

And yet research has also found that you are 4.5 times more likely to be shot during an assault if in possession of a weapon.

Results. After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (P < .05) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 (P < .05).

2009 university study: Gun owners 4.46 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. :: The Political CarnivalThe Political Carnival


And yes, I read post#10.

I'm pretty sure a study by the Department of Justice trumps a university study.

----------------

Edit:
I took one look at your link, this is the first thing I saw:

Yesterday I posted &#8220;Mother of 9 year-old killed in Tucson shooting demands a plan to end gun violence; Giffords, Kelly launch anti-gun lobby campaign.&#8221; It&#8217;s gratifying to see a common sense movement take shape&#8230; finally. Rachel Maddow discussed that very thing here:

This immediately tells me that it's a heavily biased source, and they cite the very few studies that were favorable to them, and these studies don't release or make their methods available.

You can investigate how the Department of Justice does their studies, and the FBI.

-------------

Also, why do you only quote 3-5 words at a time, why are you afraid to quote entire paragraphs, or even sentences? Afraid others will see the full context?

 

[Saigon]

2nd Amendment -

It is entirely possible for the research here to both be correct, while producing what might seem to be contradictory findings.

Of course there are instances where guns will prevent rapes, house break-ins or murders - I've never heard anyone suggest otherwise.

Likewise, of course there are instances where posession of a gun will turn a simply mugging into a murder, or a housebreak in into a shoot-out with multiple fatalities.

The fact remains that numerous studies have proven beyond any doubt that people owning weapons are more likely to die than those who do not.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

2nd Amendment -

It is entirely possible for the research here to both be correct, while producing what might seem to be contradictory findings.

Of course there are instances where guns will prevent rapes, house break-ins or murders - I've never heard anyone suggest otherwise.

Likewise, of course there are instances where posession of a gun will turn a simply mugging into a murder, or a housebreak in into a shoot-out with multiple fatalities.

The fact remains that numerous studies have proven beyond any doubt that people owning weapons are more likely to die than those who do not.

Yes, but the Department of Justice statistics have yielded the same results since the 1970's, all the way to the year 2000.

I wish I could get even more modern ones to see if the numbers still hold.

The DoJ statistics also go hand-in-hand with why crime skyrocketed in Chicago and Washington DC after strict gun control was passed.

It also explains why cities in Georgia have experienced 80%+ decreases in crime when they mandated everyone own and use a firearm (is that constitutional? Well the Obama mandate is, so whatever)

 

[Saigon]

2nd Amendment -

As I am sure you realise yourself, gun control can only work in the US when it covers enough of the nation that it becomes impossible for gangs and criminals to get their hands on weapons.

At the moment critics of cun control might as well go into Mogadishu, clear one block of guns and then argue that people are still being shot.

We know for an absolute fact that countries with less weapons experience less murders and suicides, and should the US ever adopt safety-based gun laws, the US will undoubtedly experience the same trend.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

2nd Amendment -

As I am sure you realise yourself, gun control can only work in the US when it covers enough of the nation that it becomes impossible for gangs and criminals to get their hands on weapons.

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (James Madison, The Federalist Papers #46 at 243-244)

Yes, I agree, but at what cost? For instance, in Cuba, they can implement strong gun control, and since they are an island, it is easier to police the black market.

But in Cuba, you have no rights, and the people will never be able to overthrow their government.

So at what cost? Your freedom and your liberty? Is that worth it? Especially when the NUMBER ONE KILLER IN HISTORY IS GOVERNMENT?

Furthermore, in a nation the size of the United States, that is not an island, it will NEVER be possible to prevent gangs and criminals from obtaining firearms. The only thing you'll manage to do is disarm law abiding citizens. And again, at what cost? Putting us at the mercy of government? A government that is ruled by foreign international banks?

Our guns are all we have left, take our guns away, and the government has NOTHING to fear. Why do you think they give us food stamps? Because they want to help us?

No, it's because if enough people were starving and their kids were starving because of this ECONOMIC HELLHOLE created by the international bankers, there would be a revolution.

Take our guns away, and you won't get food stamps, you won't get education, you won't get shit. You'll become a serf.

See this austerity bullshit happening in Europe? They can punish the people and starve them, because they aren't armed; instead of punishing the big banks that caused the problem. Within several decades Europe will have returned to its feudal roots. If we're still an armed citizenry by that time, you'll have hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing Communist Europe to come and live in the United States.

Here's the full paragraph from Federalist 48 (I divided it into several more paragraphs for readability):

The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterrupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism.

Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops.

Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it.

Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it.

 

[Saigon]

2nd Amendment -

I have no idea why Cuba would be a good basis of comparison for the US. It's small, it's not developed and it is not a western economy. Try the UK, Germany, Canada or France.

So at what cost? Your freedom and your liberty?

Countries like the UK, Germany, France and Canada are at least as free as the US, if not freer.

When innocent people are killed, they are not living free, are they? THEIR freedom also needs to be taken into account.

What separates out the US from other countries here is this manic paranoia about your own government. Other countries don't have that fear, and don't need to. If you don't like the government - don't vote for them.