3 ms·

> Then we try to pass a law to prevent what they did from happening again, hopefully this time learning from our mistakes and making the law against it airtight

> Then we try to pass a law to prevent what they did from happening again, hopefully this time learning from our mistakes and making the law against it airtight. We have evidence in countries like North Korea that government can keep total power and control against their population for a very long time. I know you don't intend it to be, but your response seems kind of like a "things will sort themselves out so let's not worry ourselves". It's this sort of apathetic response to wrongdoing that is the precursor to many evils in history.

AnthonyMouse 11y ago
You're right, it's quite the opposite. This has happened before and now we have to do it again, but we actually have to do it again -- we now have to stop it and pass new laws against it and hopefully do better this time. In other words, it's likely to happen, but only if we don't say "it's likely to happen" and then not try to make it happen because we assume it's inevitable. The fact that your side is right and usually wins in the end doesn't mean you can win without fighting. We still need to raise hell until the work is done. "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance."
kabdib 11y ago
The oppression in NK is one of the things that the second amendment is for. As it stands, the people of NK have no options. Arms in the hands of citizens is not a guarantee against abject oppression, but it's a deterrent. Banning general ownership of arms is a step that a despot must take. Naturally, a lot of people think the insurance is not worth the risk. And at the level of national politics it can be hard to separate the honestly concerned, the secretly malicious, and the useful idiots. ---- With crypto, it's pretty easy. The folks who want to ban crypto have an agenda to spy and control, or they are co-opted. Well, there are also a few useful idiots, too . . . .

AnthonyMouse 11y ago

You're right, it's quite the opposite. This has happened before and now we have to do it again, but we actually have to do it again -- we now have to stop it and pass new laws against it and hopefully do better this time. In other words, it's likely to happen, but only if we don't say "it's likely to happen" and then not try to make it happen because we assume it's inevitable. The fact that your side is right and usually wins in the end doesn't mean you can win without fighting. We still need to raise hell until the work is done. "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance."

kabdib 11y ago

The oppression in NK is one of the things that the second amendment is for. As it stands, the people of NK have no options. Arms in the hands of citizens is not a guarantee against abject oppression, but it's a deterrent. Banning general ownership of arms is a step that a despot must take. Naturally, a lot of people think the insurance is not worth the risk. And at the level of national politics it can be hard to separate the honestly concerned, the secretly malicious, and the useful idiots. ---- With crypto, it's pretty easy. The folks who want to ban crypto have an agenda to spy and control, or they are co-opted. Well, there are also a few useful idiots, too . . . .