mrstickball said:
You are correct. However, if you want to play that game, I'd love to ask you how many countries with armed populace(s) have seen their government impose a horrific, tyrannical government on themselves, and purged the armed populace. If you like, I can start with Mao, Lenin, and Hitler's purges of an unarmed populace. Also, if Mr. Brown was able to suspend parliment and institute a dictatorship in England, what would you prefer to be? Armed, or unarmed? |
ok are you suggesting that
a) said "tyrannical" regimes could have been avoided if people had guns?
b) you are comparing your own situation to that of a opressed citizen of said regime because someone wants to take your guns from you?
i can assure you it wasnt the lack of arms that kept those people in power. after a long civil war in both russia and china ,and the chinese fight against japanese occupation. there was surely no lack of em
as for germany there have been 42 attempts to assassinate hitler.. many of them included explosives.. i would say if one can get explosives.. one can also get a pistol or rifle... there simply was no motivation to do so
so why did those people in china and russia fight the old regime of loyalists to the czar and of the natiolalists of chai kai sheck.. but not mao or stalin?
