My stance on guns

[rdunk]

rdunk... History is made, I suspect.  It seems We may actually agree on something! [grin] [wink]

Yes we do, and that may be "historical!!   

The sadness of this subject, is that for the most part, it seems to boil down to gun control needs, according to governing intent, rather than any real move to address the obvious causation issues.    

[Amaterasu]

Well, We likely disagree about the cause...  I say its staged "news" devised to create the "problem," so They can manage the reaction to the "solution" that We voluntarily give up Our rights.

And I say They have been doing this for a while.

[ArMaP]

We should look to our history, and to the history of other nations, to the relevance of the people being adequately armed, to the actions of governments.

OK, could you give us some examples of cases of the people being armed resulted in the successful overthrowing of a government?
Thanks in advance.

For instance, here is a quote on the subject, by one of the most well known persons of this earth - - -

""Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest." -- Mahatma Gandhi (An Autobiography OR The story of my experiments with truth, by M.K. Gandhi, p.238)

It's not really on the subject, as the Arms Act, 1878 was not a guns ban, it was a full arms ban, including "fire-arms, bayonets, swords, daggers, spears, spear-heads and bows and arrows, also cannon and parts of arms, and machinery for manufacturing arms".

I found a page (but I have to look for it again) with some court decisions that said that even ceremonial knifes and spears were banned.

It was much worse than having people get a licence for a gun.

(The above quote comes from the only source I could find for the Arms Act, 1878, on the Digital Library of India. A plug-in is needed to see the TIFF images online, or you can use the direct links for the relevant pages (page 8 and page 9))

[Pimander]

The civil rights movement in the USA, the suffragettes in the UK (universal suffrage/vote for women) and the Indian's breaking free from the British Empire were all successful precisely because they were not violent.  If you have guns that is a perfect excuse in a state of emergency for a government to destroy you.  If you are peaceful it is next to impossible for a tyrannical regime.

Learn your history.  Please watch the whole clip as the end is the best.



And here's the guy who won your Presidential election but your guns stayed away when your nation refused to stand up for democracy.

[Amaterasu]

And when They come for You to put You in a FEMA camp...? Will non-violence work for You?

[Pimander]

And when They come for You to put You in a FEMA camp...? Will non-violence work for You?

When they come for you, do you think guns will make a difference or will they be the excuse?

[biggles]

We're allowed to have guns where I will be moving to next year because it will be like a farm, so therefore your allowed.

Put it this way, any nasties turn up on our property wanting to wreck havoc they will be getting some bullets in their butt and that's that.

[rdunk]

Al Gore is a "real loser", then and now. In my opinion of course, along with many millions of others. He is a real hypocritical crook, in saying one thing and doing another -  - much like someone else we all are getting to know.

[ArMaP]

And when They come for You to put You in a FEMA camp...? Will non-violence work for You?

I know this was not an answer to me, but I would like to grab the opportunity to say that I think that non-violence is not the answer for all situations, sometimes violence is the only answer.

[spacemaverick]

Armap, I am in agreement with you.

[robomont]

wasnt there a genocide a while back where the folks killed were unarmed?
what country was it.
if i remember,i think they tried peaceful negotiations but they didnt work.
what was that country,hmm.

[Amaterasu]

When they come for you, do you think guns will make a difference or will they be the excuse?

I just know I would rather go down fighting - and if it is the EXCUSE, then this is NOT the country *I* was raised to believe in.  In fact...  It already isn't, with "Patriot" Acts, NDAA, and exec orders... TSA virtual cavity searches merely to intimidate... DHS... And on and on.

[petrus4]

And here's the guy who won your Presidential election but your guns stayed away when your nation refused to stand up for democracy.

Even if Gore had won, I would by no means have interpreted that as proof of the health of American democracy.  Gore is a narcissistic psychopath in his own right, albeit of a somewhat more mild and presentable form; but then again, Democratic Presidents always are kinder and gentler than Republicans in terms of their appearance. 

That is how the game is played.  The cabal only ever offer up psychopaths for the people to vote for; but the difference is that Democratic Presidents are consistently better at pretending that they are not.  You only need to look at the Democrats' currently incumbent offering for proof of that.

[petrus4]

When they come for you, do you think guns will make a difference or will they be the excuse?

If you are asking me whether or not I think it is genuinely going to get to that point in your country, Pimander; then I will say, probably not.  I would ask you to watch that video regardless, and listen to what he says.

This is a matter of principle; some would use the word honour. 

I am a civilian; perpetually and irrevocably.  Yet I have had experiences where my life was directly threatened, and I have also had experiences where I have had to engage in surrender in order to cut my losses, and remove myself from a situation because I could no longer tolerate it, regardless of the consequences.  I have had other experiences where, while not life threatening, I have been in a situation which seemed hopeless, yet when I remained willing to fight, I was able to prevail.

There have also been Kobayashi Maru moments; rarely.  Times when I was going to lose, no matter what I did, and I was forced to accept it, because it was obvious.  Yet what such instances taught me, is that situations where loss is inevitable, are (sometimes, not always) times when it is even more important to fight, than when you know that you have a clear chance of winning. 

This is the attitude that I should adopt more often with Amaterasu's work; which is why I might as well go ahead and say it, because she has proven again here that we understand each other.  If, purely hypothetically, I was ever going to seek another partner, then from the point of view of our shared value system at least, I currently know of no one else who I would consider more appropriate. 

This does not mean that Amaterasu necessarily needs to feel that I am making advances towards her which she needs to deflect; there have been male individuals who at times I have felt similarly towards as well, and it did not change the nature of my friendship with them, when such was acknowledged.

[ArMaP]

wasnt there a genocide a while back where the folks killed were unarmed?
what country was it.

It doesn't "ring any bells".

if i remember,i think they tried peaceful negotiations but they didnt work.
what was that country,hmm.

Peaceful negotiations that ended in genocide? I find it unlikely, what the unarmed, soon to be killed, people could have to offer in those negotiations? 

While searching for it, I found this description of the stages of genocide.

Stage	Characteristics	Preventive measures
1.Classification	People are divided into "us and them".	"The main preventive measure at this early stage is to develop universalistic institutions that transcend... divisions."
2.Symbolization	"When combined with hatred, symbols may be forced upon unwilling members of pariah groups..."	"To combat symbolization, hate symbols can be legally forbidden as can hate speech".
3.Dehumanization	"One group denies the humanity of the other group. Members of it are equated with animals, vermin, insects, or diseases."	"Local and international leaders should condemn the use of hate speech and make it culturally unacceptable. Leaders who incite genocide should be banned from international travel and have their foreign finances frozen."
4.Organization	"Genocide is always organized... Special army units or militias are often trained and armed..."	"The U.N. should impose arms embargoes on governments and citizens of countries involved in genocidal massacres, and create commissions to investigate violations"
5.Polarization	"Hate groups broadcast polarizing propaganda..."	"Prevention may mean security protection for moderate leaders or assistance to human rights groups...Coups d'état by extremists should be opposed by international sanctions."
6.Preparation	"Victims are identified and separated out because of their ethnic or religious identity..."	"At this stage, a Genocide Emergency must be declared. ..."
7.Extermination	"It is 'extermination' to the killers because they do not believe their victims to be fully human".	"At this stage, only rapid and overwhelming armed intervention can stop genocide. Real safe areas or refugee escape corridors should be established with heavily armed international protection."
8.Denial	"The perpetrators... deny that they committed any crimes..."	"The response to denial is punishment by an international tribunal or national courts"

The first stages sound familiar.

PS: it's hard to make tables in a post, but at least it's possible.