quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles I think PKC means that people like Hitler and Stalin, rulers of oppressive governments, were not overthrown by armed civilians within their state but by outside forces.

Exactly. And one of the first things that both of them did was to ban firearm ownership in their respective states.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles I think PKC means that people like Hitler and Stalin, rulers of oppressive governments, were not overthrown by armed civilians within their state but by outside forces.

no, he never assumed that in the first place. We all know that the Nazis were responsible for igniting the war. Oppressive? Germany was a great place to live in if you were not a Jew.

haha I'm a bit drunk, seriously Texas is fucked up!

quote:

Originally posted by Aquadyne Conversely, it's also the reason why Saddam was never able to pacify the Kurds during his reign, as much as he wanted to.

really? see im pretty sure he slaughtered thousands of them. with gas. where were all the men with their gun-club memberships then? biding their time? surely they didnt need the the US airforce to be constantly monitoring the country?

quote:

Originally posted by Aquadyne Exactly. And one of the first things that both of them did was to ban firearm ownership in their respective states.

so what? there are plenty of countries in the world that have banned firearm ownership, whats your point? hitler built lots of roads and mussolini made the trains run on time. should we then be suspicious of modern states that attempt the same?

are you going to compare the US to nazi germany or the USSR? if not, why are you bothering with a comparison?

quote:

Originally posted by Aquadyne To the contrary, the state is destabilized by malignant forces in the government which firearm ownership keeps in check to some extent.

so, im still waiting for the example i already asked you for. i want a modern country who was saved from the brink of dictatorship with mum and dad's licensed weaponry.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by diggerz Oppressive? Germany was a great place to live in if you were not a Jew.

Or gay or a Gypsy or mentally ill or retarded or Communist or critical of Hitler's policies or not a fan of marching around and waving a flag or an artist who did anything other than produce nationalistic rubbish...

I hope you get the picture.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Or gay or a Gypsy or mentally ill or retarded or Communist or critical of Hitler's policies or not a fan of marching around and waving a flag or an artist who did anything other than produce nationalistic rubbish... I hope you get the picture.

hahaha. still though, that's no less illogical than the argument "hitler banned guns, therefore banning guns is EVIL".

___________________

this bird wants to fly north...

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Or gay or a Gypsy or mentally ill or retarded or Communist or critical of Hitler's policies or not a fan of marching around and waving a flag or an artist who did anything other than produce nationalistic rubbish... I hope you get the picture.

it was a joke,

those were rough times indeed

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN hahaha. still though, that's no less illogical than the argument "hitler banned guns, therefore banning guns is EVIL".

Well, that isn't quite the point. The point is not just that Hitler was evil and banned guns, but that he banned guns as a means to more easily do evil. And some would argue that if keeping guns among civilians helps keep in check the evil, oppressive tendencies of governments, then it is worth it.

Personally I don't usually bother with the "keeping tyranny in check" argument, though.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Well, that isn't quite the point. The point is not just that Hitler was evil and banned guns, but that he banned guns as a means to more easily do evil. And some would argue that if keeping guns among civilians helps keep in check the evil, oppressive tendencies of governments, then it is worth it.

but nobody has established that those laws made it easier for hitler to do "evil".

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Personally I don't usually bother with the "keeping tyranny in check" argument, though.

yes, because you know its absolute horseshit. yeah, good luck taking out that tank with your M-16.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN really? see im pretty sure he slaughtered thousands of them. with gas. where were all the men with their gun-club memberships then? biding their time? surely they didnt need the the US airforce to be constantly monitoring the country?

There's a difference between slaughtering and pacifying. I don't expect you to understand it with the level of discourse that you had brought so far. But to make it an obvious example for you... it took US 3 weeks to invade and topple Iraq. But 5 years later they still have not pacified it.

quote:

so what? there are plenty of countries in the world that have banned firearm ownership, whats your point? hitler built lots of roads and mussolini made the trains run on time. should we then be suspicious of modern states that attempt the same?

How is that even comparable to anything?

What is the link between firearm ownership to make sure that citizens have a way to regain their government should it ever become out of control and building an autobahn? Please explain to me, I would love to hear the logic for this one.

quote:

are you going to compare the US to nazi germany or the USSR? if not, why are you bothering with a comparison?

You can make an example without having to compare the two directly. It is fact that one of the first things that dictatorships and totalitarian states do is outlaw firearm ownership because that is the first and major threat to that government's legitimacy, whether that legitimacy is real or not.

You can't deny that, so you might as well learn from it.

quote:

so, im still waiting for the example i already asked you for. i want a modern country who was saved from the brink of dictatorship with mum and dad's licensed weaponry.

Sure. United States.

Or Chechnya in 1994 if you want something a bit more recent.

Or Nepal this year.

The examples are plentiful.

So tell me, why do you oppose firearm ownership?