4 ms·

How so? How would having a gun in a cupboard or somewhere help you in a situation like this? Once you are at gunpoint it's game over, regardless of gun control.

by ATsch 9y ago

How so? How would having a gun in a cupboard or somewhere help you in a situation like this? Once you are at gunpoint it's game over, regardless of gun control. It's easy to imagine this is hollywood where the hero easily escapes from gunpoint with kung fu ninja skills while the evil mastermind explains the master plan but that isn't a realistic scenario. EDIT: is it just me or did this say something about airports before?

Tycho 9y ago
A few years ago the government banned civilian ownership of guns. Then, a few months ago they announced the arming of a half-million strong militia. Now they are rounding up political opposition at gunpoint. Yes, I do think it is easier to send your goons to round up enemies when only your goons have guns, and don't need to worry about getting their heads blown off. Now with they can proceed to round up whoever else they need to take care of. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-4419630/Venezuelas-Maduro-seeks-expand-armed-civilian-militias.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-4419630/Venezuel...
nemo44x 9y ago
An armed society can retaliate and react to these types of actions. As they add up and become too much an armed society can gather to fight a despot who has continually abused their power to take away inalienable rights of the people. An armed society can more easily get the backing of military generals and form a credible resistance quickly. An armed society might make a potential despot think twice about going down that route. In the scenario you describe, you're right. But as a government continues this type of abuse eventually an armed society can rebel against it. It is their responsibility to rebel against it. An unarmed society is crippled in this regard.
justadeveloper2 9y ago
Well, because when they come knocking at your door to carry you off you get to shoot one or two before they kill you. Those one or two will not make it to the next house. Do you understand how this disincentive works now?

by ATsch 9y ago

Tycho 9y ago

A few years ago the government banned civilian ownership of guns. Then, a few months ago they announced the arming of a half-million strong militia. Now they are rounding up political opposition at gunpoint. Yes, I do think it is easier to send your goons to round up enemies when only your goons have guns, and don't need to worry about getting their heads blown off. Now with they can proceed to round up whoever else they need to take care of. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-4419630/Venezuelas-Maduro-seeks-expand-armed-civilian-militias.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-4419630/Venezuel...

nemo44x 9y ago

An armed society can retaliate and react to these types of actions. As they add up and become too much an armed society can gather to fight a despot who has continually abused their power to take away inalienable rights of the people. An armed society can more easily get the backing of military generals and form a credible resistance quickly. An armed society might make a potential despot think twice about going down that route. In the scenario you describe, you're right. But as a government continues this type of abuse eventually an armed society can rebel against it. It is their responsibility to rebel against it. An unarmed society is crippled in this regard.

justadeveloper2 9y ago

Well, because when they come knocking at your door to carry you off you get to shoot one or two before they kill you. Those one or two will not make it to the next house. Do you understand how this disincentive works now?