Comment: Gun/arm control is based on a FALSE assumption, that's why.

(See in situ)


Cyril's picture

Gun/arm control is based on a FALSE assumption, that's why.

"You just wrote all that stuff up above for no reason. How much time did you waste?"

For no reason? You say so.

Wasted time? You say so.

I'm doing good with my time management, thanks. The stress, if ever, is only if I'm at work, working on something hot.

Gun/arm control is just not defensible, IMO, that's all. The rhetoric of its proponents is trapped in the FALSE assumption that government will remain reasonable once it's implemented by a government which has made illegal whatever weapons they have deemed inappropriate for the people to own.

And this is PLAIN WRONG.

Governments NEVER, EVER "stay reasonable" once they're EMPOWERED WITH A FORCE THAT HAS NOTHING IN FRONT OF IT TO BE CHALLENGED WITH.

Then, THE BRUTE FORCE of the gov't is being used by whatever TYRAN(S) of the time who found his/their way to get to the top.

Men will always be CORRUPTIBLE and EVER POWER-HUNGRIER.

It is A FACT of human nature. No People can be FREE if they have no meaningful force to oppose, IF NECESSARY, to their government.

And gun/arm control IS ALL ABOUT THE FROG IN BOILING WATER : it starts little, BUT IT IS NEVER INTENDED TO STAY SO.

It is only the beginning before ALL TYPES OF WEAPONS (that are impractical to a potential tyrannical government) are denied to the people. Indeed, it is only A QUESTION OF TIME before the latter occurs.

Thus, History PROVES them, gun control proponents otherwise. WITHOUT FAILING.

One can look back AS FAR AS ONE WISHES TO TRY FIND COUNTER-EVIDENCE. They won't.

One just needs TO EVEN BOTHER reading it, though, true.

I hope you do.

Granted, I would love, just as you do I suppose, the contrary to be true, but I'm in no denial.

If we care for our own future, we have to accept the lessons of History.

They are human things, in relation to the rulers' power and their prerogatives, and what CAN GO wrong with those if we're RECKLESS, that WE CANNOT change.

The best we can do is NOT FORGET. TO NOT REPEAT THE HARM done ... MANY TIMES. In MANY different places. In ALL TIMES.

The 2nd Amendment is all about protecting us against one of these threats. The first is about another, the fourth, yet another. Etc.

They really ARE NOT RANDOM at all. It's really not like your local restaurant's seasonal menu.

Again and again: as for the 2nd Amendment, NEITHER of its simplicity and terseness and generality were CHOSEN RANDOMLY when they wrote it.

The 2nd Amendment was CAREFULLY WRITTEN AS SIMPLE AND GENERAL AS IT IS.

Once AND FOR ALL. To PROTECT US, and not just from our next door neighbor, or crazies or home invaders.

NOT ONLY THOSE, NOT AT ALL (help yourself; hit me).

Ultimate question:

can ANYONE find me in ANY OTHER country's founding text an equivalent to this?

Please : go for it, I want to read that foreign thing, WHEREVER it may be found from.

It could be phrased slightly differently in whatever language but ***I DEMAND*** IT TO BE AS MUCH BROAD in its generality. Oh, I am sorry : this last requirement is NON-NEGOTIABLE.

(I don't like comparing apples to orange; hence the latter)

You should start searching NOW, my dear.

See, people of the United States of America ? THAT is just one facet of YOUR RIGHTS' UNIQUENESS.

And some of you folks want to challenge it?

This is EERIE to me.

Thank You, &

'Hope it helps.

"Cyril" pronounced "see real". I code stuff.

http://Laissez-Faire.Me/Liberty

"To study and not think is a waste. To think and not study is dangerous." -- Confucius