DaveP said:
Gunpoint, (Apt)
Wasn't the tyrannical government you refer to the British?
If you are actually interested in the answer to that, I would suggest reading the Federalist papers, a series of detailed arguments from our founders discussing the not yet formalized constitution. Our founders studied pretty much every form of government that went before, including using what they felt were the best parts of the british system. GB deserves credit for spreading democracy around their extensive system of colonies.
The US separation from GB was not universally embraced by all colonists at the time and we split for multiple reasons, while taxation is the common theme.
You are no longer our colony, in fact we are more like yours, so how can you fear a government that the country freely elects?
One need only look around the world for that answer. We have seen several "democratic" elections in the middle east where the more popular leadership group, changes their spots after in office. We can just about see this happening in slow motion in Egypt, where the Brotherhood, once in office are trying to move the secular government toward a theocracy. Liberty and freedom must be provided for ALL citizens not just the majority that elected the government.
Are all good men destined to go bad once they get in office?
Yes pretty much. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely...
Tyrannical governments are usually found where there is no democracy (Syria) or a religeous theocracy (Iran), don't you see that your fears appear paranoid to the rest of the free world?
Just because you are paranoid does not meant they are not after you (or your guns).
Why would the motives of a government that took away gun rights only be interpreted as tyrannical, why could they not be seen as a country finally coming of age and a recognition that the world was no longer like it was in 1760?
I see a disconnect in government with many ignoring some of the ugly realities.
Passing a new law in response to a tragic event that was already illegal seems a little misguided. To the cynical (like me) this looks like a transparent attempt by one political fraction to promote an old agenda using this tragic event as the rallying crisis. Not to mention the constitutional questions raised by Obama's threat of using executive order if he doesn't get his way in congress (which he isn't likely to). Executive order vs the 2nd amendment will surely end up in the supreme court.
As I've said before here, European countries just don't get this 2nd Amendment stuff, how do you think we live without guns? We pay the Police to look after us internally and the armed forces to do it externally, we don't have guns sloshing about everywhere so the risk is so much smaller, we are the living proof of that.
I still read news reports of gun violence in Europe, while I do not dispute that having less guns would result in less gun violence. Just like less crazy people would result in less crazy acts. Much of the debate here connected with this seems unrealistic. There has been much public disdain for even putting armed guards in schools, but the parents in CT don't seem to object to that plan, now.
A society that needs so many guns is living in fear of it's own citizens so that kind of mindset needs some serious attention.
Your opinion is registered... seems a little dismissive and pejorative, but opinions vary.
I think that the extreme inequalities in your society might have something to do with it too,
I have previously mentioned the economic element to inner city gun violence. We need more than 2.5% economic growth but will have a hard time getting that while borrowing and spending like no tomorrow, with a dysfunctional government not doing their job . The fiscal cliff was just postponed for a few months, not resolved.
there is probably nowhere else on earth where the differences between the very rich and the very poor are so great.
Huh... many people still want to emigrate here for the opportunity to rise above meager circumstance. But you must work and earn it here. If anything we are teaching a whole generation to expect government to be their momma.
It looks like envy from the rich perspective but like a rigged system to the poor.
best
DaveP
It is not a new condition for large groups of people to blame others for their lot in life.
The wealthy have long been an convenient target to rally the masses. Class warfare is a simple and transparent political strategy to gain power. There has been economic shifts happening for decades, while to partisan viewpoints this is the evil wealthy taking advantage of the poor, that argument is just to support taking that wealth and redistributing it. A broader (and IMO more accurate) view of the economic changes are related to globalization. The largest economic wealth transfer is to the poor of developing countries who are now a lot less poor. If we want to compare wealth, lets look at the real poorest of the poor. The world is a better place today than even a couple decades ago for hundreds of millions of people. One can argue for a more nationalistic and protectionist policy where unskilled workers in a wealthy western country are protected at the expense of unskilled workers in foreign countries. This is a difficult trade-off, and my personal view is to favor policy that grows the total world wealth, over preserving local wealth. This is not a zero sum game, we can actually create more wealth with free trade and continued globalization. (That said I see scary parallels to the '30s where countries devalued their currencies to gain trade advantage, Even the Swiss are printing money like no tomorrow. Japan is still in the doldrum since the '90s from trying to monetize their problems).
I am sympathetic to unskilled workers in the US who were compensated richly in the past for tasks better suited for automation. The free/easy ride is over, now they must compete with the entire world. Man up and stop blaming the wealthy who just happen to be smarter and better educated so better equipped to adapt to changes.
IMO really helping these under skilled workers is not providing unemployment forever, that only incents them to not search out jobs, but help them get training so they too can be productive members of society creating wealth commensurate with their needs. A strategy of wealth redistribution by government taking and sharing, will not end well (they always run out of rich people).
====
Of course opinions vary so maybe I'm wrong (yeah that could happen). 8)
JR
