Well, it's not an article, it's an opinion piece. And a very slanted one (and, I might add, a very poorly written one). And I recognize these are someone else's words, and not your own, but since you equated your personal views with those of this writer, I think I can safely assume that you agree with what he says here.
Yes for the most part I agree with his comments. I also agree that there is a slant to the article. Just as there is bias in the articles that are in opposition to the one presented. I posted it because it caught my eye and it did include the bit about Russia. Perhaps I'm being selfishly presumptuous in assuming that I am the "History Buff" you refer to. But you don't need a history buff. You need an expert at finding and analyzing statistics. And I know there's at least one board member who's an expert at that.
You are indeed the History Buff that I had in mind. I didn't know or couldn't think of anyone better than you, to know about the Russian inference. I actually hoped that someone would pick that up. But I am a sufficiently critical reader to note that this piece is loaded with baseless and invalid comparisons, namely:
1) Comparing Soviet Russia in the 1940s and the U.S. Today
So all these times when I have heard about History repeating itself is not accurate? I'm thinking that we are discussing Human history and not just the history of a nation. 2) Comparing the situation in the early 1780s when the Second Amendment was written and the situation in the U.S. 230 years later
So tyranny and taxation without representation no longer exists? There are a number of examples of this within our own country. Maybe they are deemed mistakes but they did happen. (remember Kent State. Ruby Ridge?) These are just instances off the top of my head. As far as taxasion goes, well a $1,000.00 toilet seat comes to mind or maybe a $500.00 hammer. We fought off the British for these reasons. Oh, they too limited the Colonialists on their guns. Unfortunately pitch forks and ax handles won't work with today's military advancement. The guns we use are like pee shooters compared with what the Government has. By the way, Yes the people I know do believe that the Government is in the business of enslaving it's people. It is just going to be done in our own best interests. Many are blind to that.
Comparing other types of violent deaths with gun deaths.
What other way would you suggest we compare? The facts are the facts. There are a lot of ways that people are killed and murdered. Many more deaths are attributed to these things. They tried prohibition of alcohol and all it did was create an underground and black market of people that still exist today. The war on drugs? Hmmmm we all know that it was lost as soon as it was declared. Now the drug companies are legally getting people hooked. Don't think for a second that it won't be increased to now include banned guns. And with the economy that is going to be further tanked by our WONDERFUL leaders those guns are going to go on sale to whomever would like to have them and not to a restricted group. Namely the sane and the responsible. There are stockpiles upon stockpiles foreseeing what we are now going to be going through. It's probably best to just leave well enough alone. You think that Mexico has a problem? How many people in law enforcement are on the take because they are getting a huge piece of the pie there?
I appreciate all that you are saying and very eloquently too. It won't make a hill of beans except by looking good on the books. Our boarders have so many holes. The Canadians, Mexicans and US can only guard so much area. Oh that's right. You don't want to have a well equipped boarder patrol or giant fences...It's all good. We will still have what we need it will just not be legal. Like cocain and heroin guns will be on the market. So let the laws take effect. We will end up supplying all kinds of people with the materials needed to wage little skirmishes. JUST LIKE MEXICO and SOUTH AMERICA. The Middle East as well. The government is breading a new way to do business and they won't be collecting the taxes on it. Hell, maybe it IS better to enact these laws. There are millions and millions of privately held land that can be used for enjoying our sport and recreational activities. Many of those friends of land owners are friends with police dept. and military folk. If the law is passed maybe those acres will just be used for TRAINING. I'm thinking that maybe the Government and the citizens that think that all this stuff should be limited and maybe neutralized should think about these things. Especially since Law enforcement and Many members of the military are LIKE MINDED. 4) And, especially, comparing death totals, and finding some more valid than others, some better than others, some "disproving" others
Again, What other way is there to reason our arguments? One of my most hated polemical arguments is the "X was bad, but..." argument. You hear it a lot when modern-day neo-Confederates and their Conservative and Libertarian allies discuss slavery, e.g., "Slavery was a bad thing, but..."
Look at the kings and lords of land and commerce. You don't think that the waifs were enslaved? It will be no different. You won't have a choice. If you leave one area for another you will still be subjugated to someone elses idea of how YOU should live and pay. Look at ancient Egypt and the pyramids. You know what they thought? “SLAVERY, IT GETS SHIT DONE” I am in no way advocating slavery. It is a fact of life. So all you learned folks can thank your lucky stars that there will be some BOLD people who do care about the symphony and opera. Otherwise you won't have enough money to enjoy them. Oh and the amount of learning institutions will drop off significantly. No-one will be able to afford them except the super rich. The white collar folks of today will one day be the middle class. MARK MY WORDS..... In this instance:
"20 dead children in Newtown is certainly a tragedy, but what about the 25 children killed by our government at Waco?"
What about them? Are you arguing that the fact that five more children died at Waco mean that we should dismiss the five fewer children who died in Newtown? Or that, killing children having become some sort of norm, we should ignore what happened in Newtown, and not take a single step -- or even have a discussion -- to insure that what happened in Newtown never happens elsewhere again?
[color=pinkThe steps I think should be taken are armed folks to protect our kids. ][/color]
Another line that jumped out at me:
"As we all know by now, since banning most firearms, the UK has become the most violent country in Europe."
Though it strains credulity, I'll accept the accuracy of that statement. But for it to be germane to this discussion, the author would have to compare statistics between the U.K. and the U.S., and not the U.K. and the rest of Europe. (Well, he'd also have to demonstrate cause and effect between banning firearms and increased violence in the U.K., which he clearly does not.)
[color=pinkThe Statistics can be skewed by either side. Which they probably are. ][/color]
One final point that you have demonstrated over and over in your many posts on this topic: you remain absolutely blinkered and monolithic in your thinking. Over and above what Farmer Miles accurately describes as your "bloodlust," you fail to realize that the majority of those who favor stricter controls on the sale and possession of firearms and ammunition do not support an outright ban. Though this author (and, I assume, you) would disagree with this, there is nothing remotely incompatible (or hypocritical) with the point of view I support:
Lets address “MY BLOODLUST” First.
Have either of you ever killed anything? I hunt. Not just because I like to kill wild game. Though it is a fun challenge. It is primal. Just like building a fire or catching fish and cleaning them. It's natural. It is what I was taught and others like me have been taught for all of the history of mankind. It's our ability to see blood and cut the guts out of game that puts food on YOUR table. How do you think you get those wonderful cuts of beef, pork, chicken,fish,turkey,?
?? Please tell me that you have the stomach to open up a critter and slice the hide off of it and take the muscle off of the bone so you can sit in a restaurant with a glass of wine and eat a wonderful meal. SOMBODY HAD TO DO THAT. I'm one of those people. So look at your next steak and say to yourself. Did a blood lusty bastard like Janus really use a knife to cut the meat off of the bones? You cut your steak but aren't thinking about the person that cut it raw off of the animal.
Another point I'd like to make: Have either of you had to wade through a pool of blood to give CPR to a someone that was clearly dead? I have. I don't want to have to ever blow air into another human being and have blood shoot from the eye socket because he was beaten to death with a trash can. So FUCK YOU if you think my BLOODLUST is terrible. I don't have it. I just don't have any qualms about killing someone that means me harm. * I strongly believe that much stricter controls on the sale and purchase of both firearms and ammunition must be enacted, and at the federal level, if necessary.
Believe it all you want. You are just asking for more trouble....* I strongly believe that those who demonstrate they can responsibly purchase, own, and maintain firearms -- and demonstrate they are trained to use them properly -- must be guaranteed the right to do so.
I think that is wonderful Barbara. So leave us alone so we can pursue our own kind of happiness. There are way more law abiding gun people than not law abiding gun people. Imagine that! An intelligent and nuanced outlook!
Yup, sure enough. Slanted to be exactly how you want it. We all do it. We always try to make the other happy with a slight edge in our own favor.