Hi, Cathoholic!
That’s exactly my point!
In Latin American (our closest explosive bodies) the governments or the anti-government agencies do not care if people have guns or not; they will terrorize their own mothers if they threaten their “cause.”
Anyone that wants to own weapons in the US can and have done so (some posters have offered 300,000,000 guns in the hands of 100,000,000 Americans); yet, the reality is that even if every person in America would have access to one or several weapons, if the government were to turn against its people there would be a tyrannical force that would not care if millions were to be razed out of existence. Conversely, the majority of people are too horror tactics-inept (not properly trained to disassociate themselves from reason and human dignity) to counter such extremely destructive force.
In China (and other parts of the world) the government turns against its people with rage and murder on its mind (Tiananmen Square) as the armed forces meet unarmed citizens with automatic weapons and tanks… this cruelty and mayhem is rooted in a history that these governing bodies have not determined to terminate from its tools of governance. In the US we have had similar dark experiences but the governing body has been moving away from it.
The more the US citizens get involved in the affairs of the governance the more that such violence would remain far removed.
So instead of espousing gun ownership with that romanticized militia that will come together to forced the tyrannical power that be (which only exists in the mind of the die hard anarchist) to uphold the United States’ Constitution, just say that you want to own more weapons than you can count–and be done with this innate argument. No militia will conquer a tyrannical power bent on destruction.
People talk about the colonial war against England as though a huge military power (Goliath) was done in by a few farmers and a few defectors from the British (David)… here’s what transpired during those years of battle for independence:
Between 1689 and 1763, there were no less than four colonial wars that involved France, Britain, and Spain and their respective colonial possessions. Rightly called “Wars for Empire”, these conflicts were extensions of wars that had erupted on the European mainland or on the high seas over balance of power, expansionism, mercantilism, and Indian alliances. (
http://www.history.nd.gov/exhibits/lewisclark/colonialwars.html)
Had Britain resources not been overtaxed, had Britain not been caught up in such terrible overreach, do you truly believe we would not be “hailing” the queen, right now, instead of claiming 1st, 2nd, 3rd…?
Maran atha!
Angel
