And why it wouldn't have been this easy?
They were taken by force when they were vulnerable, at work, drunk, just in the street...
If they were armed it wouldn't have changed a thing. Police wasn't coming to you and ask you to come. They were seeing you, getting you in range of fire and threatening you with a rifle then asked you to kneel and they controled you and maybe deported you.
You took your gun you would be dead before able to fire.
My point isn't nick picking.
It's that armed population wouldn't change a thing because when the dictator is in control it's too late. The people have to fight BEFORE. When dictatorship is here the only solution is revolution. And weapons don't change a thing because when it's revolution time it always works, cause soldiers are always too few.
Just because you imagine it in your pacifist mind doesn't make it reality. The fact is that armed populations are not only less likely to be attacked by totalitarian governments, but YES, it would have changed something. Some of those people coming to round up civilians would be killed and they would be forced to consider if it is worth giving their life for a dictatorship. Not everyone is drunk, sleeping, or otherwise vulnerable all at the same time. It has already been well established people will give their life for freedom, so this is not a question.
BTW exactly how are unarmed people's supposed to have a revolution? Revolutions do NOT always work, why would you even say such an idiotic thing? What is stopping that artillery from being placed upon unarmed revolts? Nothing. At least if the people are armed they have the ability to RESIST, and make some of the people perpetrating the abuse pay with their lives.
What's fun is how what I say is just "idiotic opinion" and what you say is the truth while non of us having anything to support our claims. I don't think it would help the population because an authoritarian government comes into power thanks to the support of the population then can be thrown out only if a massive part of the population revolts and if they do then the military (which are PART of this population) supports them. Not saying I have the truth, just giving my point of view on this subject.
Anyway you're really a tiring person. Because I say Bible is as violent as Coran you assume I'm just crying and defending Islam. Because I say I don't think weapons would help to defend against the government you assume I'm a pacifist.
Well if you're so good at assuming, no need to even come here to debate, just assume someone is discussing with you.
Your statement itself was idiotic, because it violates common rules of logic.
...And weapons don't change a thing because when it's revolution time it always works, cause soldiers are always too few.
You used an inclusive word, "always", so by definition of your own standards you are automatically wrong. That is in fact idiotic.
I have produced information to support my claims, just because you haven't bothered to read the entire thread does not negate that fact. Totalitarian governments get into power regardless of the population's resistance or support, they are totalitarians, by definition they couldn't give a fuck less what the opinions of the populace are. I called you a pacifist because you prefer to leave people defenseless rather than allow them to be capable of defending themselves. If the population is unarmed and the totalitarian government is armed, then how exactly will this imaginary unarmed revolution take place? You claim the military will not stand for it, but Obama has been cleaning house in the military quite a bit placing people in the military who are obedient to him. Even if for the sake of argument lets say half of the domestic military forces resist, you still are not accounting for the possibility of armed contractors like Blackwater/Xe, NATO, the UN, Russian, Chinese, or other coalition forces being deployed on US domestic soil to quell any revolt. This amount of manpower could easily overwhelm any resisting domestic military force without the population being armed.
I am glad I am wearing you down, maybe it will make you think twice before spouting your mindless nonsense in the future. You are putting peoples lives at risk preaching disarmament for common people. BTW try to keep it on topic, no one is talking about religion here.
Ok does it suit you better if I say "most of the times" or "often" or something like that?
When 80% of the population revolts, it works.
And you maybe produced some bullshit for your claims or some informations, but it doesn't change how partial and cherry picking you are. You most of the time just use semantic arguments, not really convincing.
I'm glad you speak a better English than me. Well done. Can we talk about something else?
And seriously wtf is this argument?
If after a totalitarian government emerges in the USA and manages to take power while 80% of the people want their destitution, you think about the possibility of a foreign intervention on US soil? xD
First that's not an argument, we can talk about how useful weapons could be in alien or zombie invasion if you want too! Second what could you do against a world coalition with your untrained population? Resist until death? Wow so much better ^^
If NATO, UN and China plus Russia make an alliance with the US government to "oppress the people" it's the end of the US. With or without guns. Doesn't change a thing.
