2 ms·

> Personally I'd rather put my trust in democracy. That's simply naive. You don't think powerful elites do and will try everything to gain and maintain power o

> Personally I'd rather put my trust in democracy. That's simply naive. You don't think powerful elites do and will try everything to gain and maintain power over the peasants? Personally I'd rather put my trust in having some way to fight back when the inevitable happens instead of being powerless. > India in Kashmir Not sure why you think Kashmir is tyrannical? Your other examples are also flawed. The fights happening in lets say Syria are tribal infighting - similar to gang fighting on a larger scale. Similar to Chicago gangs on a larger scale. Despite all the flaws of Assad, most Syrians like him. It's the same thing as what happened in Libya or Iraq. Regime change wars is what destroyed those countries thanks to which there's slavery back in Libya. This has happened several times in history. People get disarmed, then their rights get taken away. The most recent example is Venezuela. 2012: "Venezuela bans private gun ownership" https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-18288430 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-18288430 2017: Venezuela: Video Shows Armored Vehicle Rolling Over Protesters https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/venezuela-video-shows-armored-vehicle-rolling-over-protesters-n754891 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/venezuela-video-shows-ar... 2019: "MSNBC Admits: Because Venezuelans Were Disarmed, They Have No Power Against the Government" https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2019/05/01/msnbc-admits-because-venezuelans-were-disarmed-they-have-no-power-against-the-government-n2545639 https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2019/05/01/msnbc-... I have friends in Hong Kong who literally prayed that USA doesn't give away their guns.

natmaka 5y ago
The classic argument stating that tyrants try as early and hard as possible to confiscate weapons from civilians is another cue. An army pretty much knows the truism stating that occupying is more easy if the zone is gun-free. There is an often-neglected complement: by the same principle an army fighting against another which occupies a nation usually try to deliver weapons to civilians rebelling against the invader, even if manufacturing and delivering them dissipates very precious resources. It was quite patent during WW2, for example in France where the OSS and SOE parachuted a huge amount of weapons to the Résistance and Maquis movements. In the same vein the German army, during the invasion, quickly confiscated civilian weapons (they were registered) and was then very reluctant to deliver weapons to their local sympathizers (at first and for an extended period they bluntly refused).

natmaka 5y ago

The classic argument stating that tyrants try as early and hard as possible to confiscate weapons from civilians is another cue. An army pretty much knows the truism stating that occupying is more easy if the zone is gun-free. There is an often-neglected complement: by the same principle an army fighting against another which occupies a nation usually try to deliver weapons to civilians rebelling against the invader, even if manufacturing and delivering them dissipates very precious resources. It was quite patent during WW2, for example in France where the OSS and SOE parachuted a huge amount of weapons to the Résistance and Maquis movements. In the same vein the German army, during the invasion, quickly confiscated civilian weapons (they were registered) and was then very reluctant to deliver weapons to their local sympathizers (at first and for an extended period they bluntly refused).