I've been busy today fighting water pipes that are not insulated well enough against the cold, so I am behind in my writing.
"I still do not understand why say that unarming certain populations is different than unarming Americans when the reason for arms is so that people can justly obtain and maintain their rights?"
We may not be communicating well. The concept of easy or not as easy is my point. Relatively speaking: America is going to be less easy to bring about mass disarmament of devices called guns compared to how easy it will be to bring about mass disarmament of devices called guns as some of the people use devices called guns, and devices call lies, to remove guns from the masses of people in America, or anywhere on the planet.
I can certainly be wrong.
You offered the example of what happened in a small place in Africa RELATIVE to the largest of 50 States in America.
My point included the concept of population density as a function of how easy or how difficult it is to disarm the masses of people by some people.
Some people = criminals with or without badges = vast minority
Masses of people = honest productive people = the source of wealth = the source of power = a larger number of people compared to "some people".
Some people, so defined, will have a harder (relatively speaking) time disarming the masses of people, so defined, in America, for reasons that include:
1. America is very large in physical area.
2. America is very low in population density.
3. Americans tend to be generations of people who fled places where "some people" (defined above) disarmed masses of people (defined above), so Americans are not, in that way, culturally, or genetically, predisposed to give up their POWER to defend themselves, or at least figure out a way to avoid being disarmed (voting with their feet, even if it costs almost everything to do so).
4. America is armed to the teeth and if you have spent any amount of time in rural areas you may know this as well as I do, whereby the average American is armed and therefore the physical work load of confiscating such a large number of guns, per person on average, makes it, so defined, relatively more difficult to disarm Americans compared to any other place on Earth, with few exceptions, such as Switzerland.
I can try to make my viewpoint clearer as you offer to me more generous opportunities to do so as you respond on this topic, disarmament, so defined.
I have not finished reading your reply with the very welcome scriptures from The Bible having to do with Joshua and the orders to kill babies. I do not seek to test your faith, my goal is to know better myself. I'm selfish in that way, and even if my goal, on some level, is to offer to you a competitive viewpoint on The Bible, to test your faith (so defined), then my interest is again to help me know better. I am not an authority on The Bible. I don't pretend to be one. I do not profess to be one. But orders to kill babies, to me, are orders to be rejected, and I don't care who says they know better about those orders.
I can also check those links offered, but for now I have to take my daughter food shopping.