Which country do come form where you fight dictatorship with stones and bottles and get gassed but you have uncerosed internet connection to talk about videogames on a US website?

I'm not implying anything, just asking

Not uncensored. This is just not a page my government cares enough to censor at the moment. Any website made here with clear criticisms against the government gets blacklisted. Also, I would rather not talk about my nationality openly. If you think I'm lying then that's that but my points still stand.

Yeah it's pretty ridiculous. If the government is out to kill citizens, a gun won't protect you at all, it will only make you a target. Good luck fighting against tanks and helicopters with a gun or rifle.

Actually no. If a tyrant had to take control of part of the country's militia the only opposing force to realistically counter it would be the restant part of the army, or an army from another country. Private citizens with a couple of rifles and pistols would still be pretty much worthless.

You say even a tyrannical goventment would think twice before murdering its own people in order to avoid rebellions. I would say usually it's the contrary, a tyrant uses violence to instill fear and avoid insubordinance. In any case, again guns for personal security are still completely irrelevant, murdering would still be considered unacceptable by common people even if citizens have guns to supposedly "defend themself".

"There have been guerrilla movements that have defeted powerfull centralized governments for centuries". Give an example in contemporary times of a guerilla movement that have successfully overthrown a regime without the intervention of an organized army or substantial support from another country. Give me an example where the regime has got resources and technology even remotely comparable to today's US army.

1. Yes, a rebel faction of the country's military would almost always be necessary for a successful coup but the private citizens with guns wouldn't be worthless. Like the French resistance during WW2. You get a group of people with clear objectives to try to hurt a tyrannical army and you put pressure. Shoot small patrols, resist against the takeover of private property, etc etc. Kill 5 for each person you lose. Stuff like that. Of course a lot of people would die, but we are talking about a civil war. I guarantee you that if you were in your home and the hand of tyranny came knocking to the door ready to take you or anyone in your family deemed an "undesirable" you wouldn't say "pistols and rifles are worthless". You would be doing everything in your power to protect yourself and those you love. Well, we lost that right here where I live. I certainly hope the Americans don't lose it.

2. Of course they would use fear and oppression. I never said they wouldn't. What I'm saying is that your argument that "the govt. has tanks, helicopters, jets" etc etc is not a good argument simply because a tyrannical government wouldn't use all those weapons all the time. Sometimes you would have military patrols going around from house to house, I mean, the US govt. did that in Afghanistan. You can't just blow apart every single building with massive ordinance if you are trying to suppress your own people or you lose huge chunks of the population and break your own economy in the process.

3. Again, not irrelevant. Murder is unacceptable by most people, true, but it depends on the context. If we are talking about a possible rebellion against tyranny I believe most people would adapt to fight under any circumstance. When you have the boot of tyranny crushing your face you don't get your freedom back by saying "please" or by marching peacefully.  Which is something the people of my country sadly found out too late.

4. I'm  not gonna say that international support or an organized army (in this case rebel army) is irrelevant. Of course that kind of stuff is a huge factor in a civil war. But I still think private gun ownership and the people fighting against tyranny any way they can, in this case with firearms, is important and a first step towards freedom. And to your final point, I ask you this: What exactly is your solution if not to fight with what you have?. If the American people have access to pistols, shotguns, rifles, etc that aren't military grade but can still kill the helpers of tyranny, would you take them away just cause they can't take down an Apache helicopter with it?.

I just don't understand your perspective. If tyranny comes knocking on your door you would just lie down and take the bullet? Get shoved into prison to remain there for the rest of your life?. That's fine for you?. The price of a "peaceful" society?. If that's the way you see things then I'm not gonna pretend I can change your mind, but I certainly hope the American people don't give away the rights that people like me can only dream about having.

...If you believe you could make that argument, then go for it. By all means. I'll be here.

PS: The War on Drugs wasn't actually a war...

I'm not even going to debate the four points since there are so many worng assumptions I don't even know where to begin with and it would most likely lead to an endless discussion.

Just awnsering your final question. A tyrant just does not come "knocking on your door". A regime can only emerge and take root in a situation of severe economic stress, high social tension and political unstability. If you want to prevent the rise of a violent movement or ideology you have to sustain policies to reduce inequality, reduce social tension, promote economic growth and inclusion. Have you ever noticed that a coup usually doesn't happen in countries where most people have high standards of living?

1. I don't regret anything of what I've said but I agree. You are not going to change my mind and I won't change yours so that's that.

2. I think you misunderstood me.  I will try to explain myself again. My argument was that if tyranny took hold in your country and it's not a matter of voting against them anymore, they are there and you have groups of military going door to door taking "undesirables" to prison and you and/or your loved ones are in danger; Would you prefer to have something to defend yourself with or nothing?.

3. I agree with you completely in everything you said. The best way to prevent a dictatorship is to promote economic growth so everyone gets a chance to find their own happiness in a free society. However, neither you nor me can predict the future. A period of great hardship may emerge where unscrupulous people take power and use it to oppress the people. There is always a possibility something like that may happen. Always. Doesn't matter how impossible it may seem, all that is needed is a strong enough crisis and the evil people to take advantage of it. For that reason I will always support private gun ownership.

"What does the police brutality in the US have to do with a totalitarian state?"

you said that gun control results in less police brutality, my argument is that you are absolutely wrong, according to history we see the opposite

"Do you think there is any danger of government overreach in states like Canada, Australia or Germany?"

i swear even though i knew this was coming an incredulous smile just broke out on my face

uh well i don't think that the people who are in leadership roles today have any less potential to be despotic

i suppose what i'd have to ask you is why you think otherwise? 

and its ironic that you mention canada, wasn't there a big outroar recently over people being compelled by law to use transgender pronouns?

"Do you think anyone there fears their government "

if they do not fear the potential harm that can come from ceding too much power to government then they are stupid fullstop

"This argument to have guns just to protect yourself from the government is ridiculous."

its not if you believe in the right to defend yourself and you understand that its not wise to carelessly give flawed human beings control over your life

"Unless you think the US army are all pussies and are scared of a few handguns."

i've said this before and i'll say it again, i'm glad that people like you were not around when the fighting to make america independent from britain occurred

those people did not say "well the government is way more powerful than we are so lets just roll over and let them have their way with us"

no, they said fuck that shit and fought for their freedom

so just sit back and allow an oppressive government take over your life, don't resist, just sit there and let them enslave you... sounds fair i guess

i personally would not choose that option but you do you 

... and i suppose no populations throughout history have ever overthrown despots according to your worldview?