Politics & News > Politics

Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

I Have Something to Say

A LITTLE GUN HISTORY

In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.

Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

56 million defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control:

You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding citizens.

Take note my fellow Americans, before it's too late!

The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, please remind them of this history lesson.

With guns, we are "citizens". Without them, we are "subjects".

During WWII the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!

If you value your freedom, please spread this antigun-control message to all of your friends.

SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A GUN!
SWITZERLAND'S GOVERNMENT TRAINS EVERY ADULT THEY ISSUE A RIFLE.
SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD!!!
IT'S A NO BRAINER!
DON'T LET OUR GOVERNMENT WASTE MILLIONS OF OUR TAX DOLLARS IN AN EFFORT TO MAKE ALL LAW ABIDING CITIZENS AN EASY TARGET.

Spread the word everywhere you can that you are a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment!

It's time to speak loud before they try to silence and disarm us.

You're not imagining it, history shows that governments always manipulate tragedies to attempt to disarm the people.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Wellington · M

It is an argument and a debate but these should be based on sound facts. Simply copying internet pages which seem a little short on objectivity and facts - erodes your case and any point you wish to make.

Jackaloftheazuresand · 26-30, M

@Wellington I just have one point for you then, how do you defend yourself from your military should it be used against you? That's what this boils down to.

Wellington · M

@Jackaloftheazuresand Does it? I beg to differ. The post borrows on much but skewed and plain wrong facts do nothing for any boiling down.

Jackaloftheazuresand · 26-30, M

@Wellington It doesn't really matter that his post has false information when the question still stands.

Pherick · 41-45, M

@Jackaloftheazuresand Let me ask you, what, with your AR15, are you going to do if the US military comes for you? A quick drone strike and poof you are gone.

If you really want to have protection against a US military, you should get into lobbying against the US-Military complex, you have no chance with civilian arms against the military.

Wellington · M

@Jackaloftheazuresand Perhaps @Pherick has nailed it.

Jackaloftheazuresand · 26-30, M

@Pherick You misunderstand military tactics in first world nations. A drone strike would destroy too much and would only be used after the people have revolted and the government could balance the loss. They send soldiers first.

Pherick · 41-45, M

@Jackaloftheazuresand If the military is at the point of using strike drones on US soil, I would bet they don't care about losses :)

Jackaloftheazuresand · 26-30, M

@Pherick But by then the people could have seized a military base and equipment, I've studied successful rebellions, I know the patterns, you speak from rhetoric, do you not?

Wellington · M

@Jackaloftheazuresand "I've studied successful rebellions"
If you would care to detail - sources would be good, What you have studied would be of interest.

Pherick · 41-45, M

@Jackaloftheazuresand [quote]I've studied successful rebellions,[/quote]

Are you a Ph.D. in History specializing in Successful Rebellions? Otherwise, you are a guy on the Internet who has read some. As have I. So not impressed.

"seized a military base and equipment" sounds easy, doesn't it? Did the retreating soldiers spike the vehicles? Blow up any weapons and ordinance before it falls into your enemy hands? Do you have keys for everything, know how to service all the equipment? Is their fuel available? How quickly will the rest of the US military bomb the shit out of you now that you have gathered in one place?

Doesn't sound very successful to me.

Jackaloftheazuresand · 26-30, M

@Wellington Start with the wikipedia pages on revolutions and civil wars from around the world. I have the research papers I wrote on word documents but I can't access them without the program, I know you won't believe that but here's the evidence of it that I can provide.
[image deleted]If you see at the top, I don't have the product

Jackaloftheazuresand · 26-30, M

@Pherick You would have the people give up because it's difficult, thus rhetoric that I have seen a million times, I pieced the patterns together myself, nobody told me like they did with you

Wellington · M

@Jackaloftheazuresand No rush - and please do not include such phrases as " I know [i][b]you won't believe that[/b][/i] but here's the evidence of it that I can provide. Neither you integrity - nor mine I hope, is being debated.

I do note the OP has failed to comment or add to the post.

Jackaloftheazuresand · 26-30, M

@Wellington Okay. I apologize for that, I hadn't meant to debate that, I like to cover my bases before someone does call me out which has happened too many times for me.

Pherick · 41-45, M

@Jackaloftheazuresand I am not sure what your argument here is. Are you arguing that having an AR15 is a deterrent to a military attack on your home?

Are you arguing that an armed civilian force could successfully ... something military? Attack it? Defend against it, win against it?

Jackaloftheazuresand · 26-30, M

@Pherick Yes for the second part. On the first I doubt it would deter, I think as I do because I want a fighting chance not because I am sure of an outcome.

Pherick · 41-45, M

@Jackaloftheazuresand I am just not sure I agree. Are there any references you know of, where a military turned against its people and with a severe edge in firepower, the people were able to resist and win?

While I don't doubt people might be able to commandeer some military gear here and there, the military will have access to the latest gear, the planes, the helicopters, the big bombs, etc.

I can't really see a scenario that would let the rebellion win, and any that they did, I can't see the average AR-15 having anything to do with it.

Jackaloftheazuresand · 26-30, M

@Pherick None that I can cite currently. What's common with these things is at least having enough to combat infantry. It's going to get really interesting if we ever create android soldiers capable of fully replacing the human ones because then we lose one of the pillars which is recruiting police and defectors.

This is a better field for us, I'm glad we came back to treating my position as reasonable thought instead of scoffing at it as asinine. In the interest of that I extend my branch in that addressing the military complex as you said is something that must be done as well.

Pherick · 41-45, M

@Jackaloftheazuresand Well I am being polite, but I don't think your position is reasonable. As I have mentioned quite a few times and you haven't addressed, our military is ALOT more than infantry.

while I suppose a rebel force could, in theory, hold off the infantry for a period, you are ignoring all the air forces, then ground vehicles, and not even counting having your forces blow away by ship to ground missiles.

So I will state again, gun ownership, at this point in history will not save us from a true military coup. If the military truly commits, its over for us.

Obviously, this was a different story when the 2nd Amendment was written, there were better guns than what your average citizen had, but mildly better, not you have an AR-15 and I have a tank better.

Jackaloftheazuresand · 26-30, M

@Pherick The infantry comes first, the people must act then by escaping them and staging their offensive on bases and manufacturing, taking what personnel they can for training endeavors and seizing those machines of war to truly fight back. None of this works if the people are shut down from the beginning because all they have are shotguns and limited ammunition for other weapons.

Pherick · 41-45, M

@Jackaloftheazuresand That sounds like a great novel.

It just comes down to though, you are agreeing with me, civilian weapons wouldn't stop a military coup. Which is one of the main excuses used by pro-gun people to fight against any kind of gun control?

AHugo · 61-69, M

@Wellington Agreed.