2 ms·
>As if you could actually know something like that better than I. The level of arrogance is too damn high. And you avoided many points, like civiliant against
by jQueryIsAwesome 14y ago
>As if you could actually know something like that better than I.
The level of arrogance is too damn high.
And you avoided many points, like civiliant against civilian violence in the scenary of a civil war.
- tsotha 14y ago>The level of arrogance is too damn high. I don't think I'm being particularly arrogant by pointing out your knowledge of my country is of the primary school variety. Even if you had a more average grasp of US society and politics, you still wouldn't know as much as an American. That's just basic common sense, something which seems to be in short supply on your end. >And you avoided many points, like civiliant against civilian violence in the scenary of a civil war. That's not a "point" at all. How does it relate to the discussion?
- jQueryIsAwesome 14y agoWell; you say that guns are good because if a revolution is needed is better if the citizens have guns; the problem is that in revolutions the civilians who doesn't want it also have guns; so it gets really violent without affecting any "tyrant".
- tsotha 14y agoOf course it depends on the circumstances. Typically a tyrant maintains power by buying off a small portion of the total population. It can be as little as 10%. Somebody like Marcos in the Philippines comes to mind.