4 ms·

> but what Hong Kong would be like right now if all citizens hard arms? The chinese are slowly removing democratic institutions away from the people. The peopl

> but what Hong Kong would be like right now if all citizens hard arms? The chinese are slowly removing democratic institutions away from the people. The people are rising up to protect them without guns. Democratic norms are slowly being eroded from the US as well. Extreme gerrymandering, electoral college / popular vote, overt foreign interference, requested foreign interference, voting irregularities, voter purges, voting machine irregularities, a complicit senate, out of control corporate funding / ownership / bribery of politicians. What are the people with guns doing? Nothing. In some cases cheering it on with claims of "if your side tries anything we are armed and ready". Does having an armed population really protect the people from the government? Does it protect a democracy? does it protect the constituion? Or is more likely they become a paramilitary wing of a corrupt government? Just look around the world and see what happens in other countries with a heavily armed population? Then tend to form groups to have power, slowly becoming war lords, which the politicians then use a power source to keep the population in check. Maybe an armed population made sense a few hundred years ago (maybe not though), but am going to have to see some working out to show it is still relevant today before being believed as an unquestionable truth. Some examples would be good. And before everyone shouts SWITZERLAND SWITZERLAND. If you are comparing the US population to Switzerland, I think you have more homework todo as all that shows you, there is a lot more to it than just having guns.

Trav5 7y ago
> does it protect the constituion? Or is more likely they become a paramilitary wing of a corrupt government? Good point, but you are lumping all gun owners into one mindset. I could definitely see that happening, but it would not be all gun owners, just a percentage. And of the many gun owners I know, the percentage that would support any government and impose anything on others would be really low.
- ethbro 7y ago
  Guns are necessary but not sufficient. Guns + independent, civil society groups are what make a healthy democracy. The idea is to back civil society with an implicit, but never used, question of force. If things break down into shooting, that's civil war. And who knows what happens next, but it's not likely to be good for anyone or the country.
- MiroF 7y ago
  okay but like which generally happens in countries with are level of development? definitely the paramilitary reality, not the "rise up" against government reality.
nanomonkey 7y ago
A good example would be the YPG (People's Protection Units of Rojava), where the defensive power of guns is equally distributed and rotated through the population so that everyone shares in the responsibility. It's hard to over use your power when you know that someone else's grandma will later have that power.
arcticfox 7y ago
Republican senators in my home state (Oregon) that abandoned their posts actually threatened to shoot state troopers sent after them [1]. It's hard to say guns help democracy when they're so literally being put to use to break it. I'm rather neutral on the issue itself, I see pros and cons, but the fact that the insane, often completely unreasonable group has lined up on one side makes me want to take the other. [1] https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2019/06/oregon-republican-senator-issues-threat-to-state-troopers.html https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2019/06/oregon-republica...
CamperBob2 7y ago
Maybe an armed population made sense a few hundred years ago (maybe not though), but am going to have to see some working out to show it is still relevant today before being believed as an unquestionable truth. Try taking over a Federal installation without being well-armed, and see if it goes anywhere near as well for you as it did for the Branch Dildonians. Pro tip: cameras are almost as important as guns. Bring both.
bamboozled 7y ago
Sorry, I wasn’t trying to convince you or anyone else they having guns = protection for democracy. It was just more of a thought experiment. I totally understand your point and I’m fully aware that there are a lot of issues and other problems with an armed population that totally suck.
jammygit 7y ago
> but what Hong Kong would be like right now if all citizens hard arms? Your comment didn’t address the quote. If Hong Kong citizens were all armed, what would be happening right now? Is there a similar historical situation we could look at?
- mantap 7y ago
  If the HK citizens were all armed, China would roll in the tanks. Good luck shooting at a tank. We live in the 21st century not the 19th.
  - nan0 7y ago
    Not a great argument, look at our 19 year war in Afghanistan.
    - brokenmachine 7y ago
      I'm sure some military nuts will correct me but isn't the problem with tanks in Afghanistan the mountains? Tanks don't work very well in mountains.

Trav5 7y ago

> does it protect the constituion? Or is more likely they become a paramilitary wing of a corrupt government? Good point, but you are lumping all gun owners into one mindset. I could definitely see that happening, but it would not be all gun owners, just a percentage. And of the many gun owners I know, the percentage that would support any government and impose anything on others would be really low.

ethbro 7y ago
Guns are necessary but not sufficient. Guns + independent, civil society groups are what make a healthy democracy. The idea is to back civil society with an implicit, but never used, question of force. If things break down into shooting, that's civil war. And who knows what happens next, but it's not likely to be good for anyone or the country.
MiroF 7y ago
okay but like which generally happens in countries with are level of development? definitely the paramilitary reality, not the "rise up" against government reality.

nanomonkey 7y ago

A good example would be the YPG (People's Protection Units of Rojava), where the defensive power of guns is equally distributed and rotated through the population so that everyone shares in the responsibility. It's hard to over use your power when you know that someone else's grandma will later have that power.

arcticfox 7y ago

Republican senators in my home state (Oregon) that abandoned their posts actually threatened to shoot state troopers sent after them [1]. It's hard to say guns help democracy when they're so literally being put to use to break it. I'm rather neutral on the issue itself, I see pros and cons, but the fact that the insane, often completely unreasonable group has lined up on one side makes me want to take the other. [1] https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2019/06/oregon-republican-senator-issues-threat-to-state-troopers.html https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2019/06/oregon-republica...

CamperBob2 7y ago

Maybe an armed population made sense a few hundred years ago (maybe not though), but am going to have to see some working out to show it is still relevant today before being believed as an unquestionable truth. Try taking over a Federal installation without being well-armed, and see if it goes anywhere near as well for you as it did for the Branch Dildonians. Pro tip: cameras are almost as important as guns. Bring both.

bamboozled 7y ago

Sorry, I wasn’t trying to convince you or anyone else they having guns = protection for democracy. It was just more of a thought experiment. I totally understand your point and I’m fully aware that there are a lot of issues and other problems with an armed population that totally suck.

jammygit 7y ago

> but what Hong Kong would be like right now if all citizens hard arms? Your comment didn’t address the quote. If Hong Kong citizens were all armed, what would be happening right now? Is there a similar historical situation we could look at?

mantap 7y ago
If the HK citizens were all armed, China would roll in the tanks. Good luck shooting at a tank. We live in the 21st century not the 19th.
- nan0 7y ago
  Not a great argument, look at our 19 year war in Afghanistan.
  - brokenmachine 7y ago
    I'm sure some military nuts will correct me but isn't the problem with tanks in Afghanistan the mountains? Tanks don't work very well in mountains.