Quotidian wrote:Well, I favor any government over a self-appointed militia with automatic weapons.
Are not governments made of the same men that would be in a militia? Do you think a militia lacks institutional integrity or organization? The Revolutionary War was won with the sweat of militias. I find it hard to believe you would choose North Korean Faschism or Mussoulinis Italy over a militia made up of you, your neighbors and family.
Quotidian wrote: It's not outside the realm of possibility, although I don't think it will actually happen in the USA.
You don't "think" it could happen?
Do you really feel comfortable with your naivete?
This peaceful future that doesn't require guns you dream of what does it look like? Does it resemble the world we live in now? This explains why are ideas are worlds apart.
Quotidian wrote:If you actually listen to Wayne LaPierre's speeches, his vision of society is truly Distopian
This is not fact. This is your personal perception. Let me preface by saying you may be right about LaPierre and in fact we stand on the same square but this one man does not invalidate the greater ideology of gun rights activists.
Quotidian wrote:He wants armed guards in every school and people with visible and concealed weapons on every street. You think this is what 'civil society' means? I would have thought that a 'civil society' was one where you didn't have to carry a gun for fear that the guy next to you might be.
Like I said ONE mans political posturing does not constitute the entire movement. I really don't understand how you could so easily prescribe to the possibility of this guy vision of the future.
This is why I don't understand.
Quotidian wrote:It's not outside the realm of possibility, although I don't think it will actually happen in the USA.
You ever so easily dismiss with half a hesitation the idea of a government fascist police state but you believe owning guns will lead to fascist police state because of a speech of a man in a group that supports gun rights.
You would leave us weaker my friend. The weak would get weaker. The strong and the criminals would get stronger. The distribution of illegal gun would sky rocket. The market would grow exponentially overnight. I don't have enough time to explain to you how harmful this is for everyone. Regulation does more harm than it does good. The seniors would get victimized by the criminal. The woman would get victimized by the strong. The father could no longer protect his kid. The hunter could no longer provide himself with food. The population could no longer defend itself from invaders. In a hypothetical apocalypse how will the good defend from the hordes of criminals? How will a person find food after the supermarket shutdowns?
The 2nd amendment is fundamental. It not only reinforces democracy but democracy would not stand without it. It is part of the fabric of this country. I'm not nearly as pro-gun as it would seem but I can't imagine a future where we just perpetually allow the government what we can own. Is this really the type of government you want?