# Why shouldn't Americans be able to defend themselves?



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

Guns and the New York Times: Why shouldn't Americans be able to defend themselves? | Fox News


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

...Because if Americans were able to defend themselves, they might decide to defend themselves against their own government.

(So, maybe it's something else?)


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

These statistics have been available for many years, as well as dozens of others in various categories that the media chooses to ignore. But forget the statistics and just answer one question (OK, maybe two):

How can any sane person believe that making laws that impact no one but law-abiding citizens will reduce gun crime?

This is a question that a ten year old can answer just as well as a rocket scientist.

Here is another:

What are the very first things a totalitarian government does to preserve its power?
Answer: (1) Seize all communication outlets; (2) Collect all weapons

These actions may very well be the first indication to the general public that they actually do have a totalitarian government.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

Bisley said:


> But forget the statistics and just answer one question (OK, maybe two):
> 
> How can any sane person believe that making laws that impact no one but law-abiding citizens will reduce gun crime?
> 
> ...


In one sense, you may be correct. What I think is that we are "controlled" by the government by letting us "think" that we actually do have freedoms, when indeed we don't in several areas. Your question about how anyone can believe that making laws that only affect law abiding citizens lowering crime is a classic though. it's actually gotten to the level of being an Oxymoron. People who obey the law don't need more laws to remind them to obey the law. You are absolutely correct in that regard. I fear that what we have is a government drunk on power whose only justification for existence is to "supposedly" make us safer by passing more laws for us to obey and the criminals to ignore.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Bisley said:


> These statistics have been available for many years, as well as dozens of others in various categories that the media chooses to ignore. But forget the statistics and just answer one question (OK, maybe two):
> 
> How can any sane person believe that making laws that impact no one but law-abiding citizens will reduce gun crime?
> 
> ...


Absolutely spot on correct. I have been saying and writing this for years. For any despotic government to gain and maintain power it has to;


Control the dissemination of information.
Remove from the people their ability to resist.
This is not only an absolute fact, it is self-evident and has been going on for centuries.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

RK3369 said:


> I fear that what we have is a government drunk on power whose only justification for existence is to "supposedly" make us safer by passing more laws for us to obey and the criminals to ignore.


It's worse than that, actually. We have a government that is experimenting with what we will let them get away with, on every level. If we let them remove free speech and disarm us, there are no more limits to be tested, because we are helpless to resist. They may let us continue to live our lives believing we are free, but only for as long as we don't test it.


----------



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

Citizens of a nation have to be disarmed if the government plans something so absolute evil, that politicians that built that government have to fear even the most peace loving people in the nation may try to fight back. 

The people always think it cant happen in my time and not in my country. But look around how many despots ruling at the moment on earth. Don't forget they all were elected. So the big socialistic movements like Mao, Pol Pot, Hitler, Stalin, etc....were elected and after that they first disarmed their citizen and than killed Millions of people.
What's the point to elect such despots? Why were they all elected? Nice laughing faces in the media empty promises and the dream once the enemy neighbor is killed they all live in a kind of Disney-Wold. Actually always the same promises. Free healthcare and a nanny welfare-state. This does it since minimum 4000 years. And also since 4000 years we know, at least when we want to know, how many have to die for socialism to realize there is no Disney-World behind all this.


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

I don't remember who said it but an armed person is a citizen, an unarmed person is a subject. the other quote is When the government fears the people you have liberty, when the people ear the government you have tyranny


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Instead of spending so much time and effort on gun control, we should re-focus our efforts on government control. 

That's where the need truly is.


----------



## RK3369 (Aug 12, 2013)

Power eventually corrupts, to varying degrees. I honestly believe the only way to fix our system is to install term limits on all Federal, State and local offices. We already have it in the presidency and I think many state governorships, but the real entrenched problems are in the legislative bodies of both the Federal and State Governments. Those folks are the ones who become entrenched and perpetuate the bloated bureaucracy they feed from. they should all be legally forced to vacate their elected positions after two terms in office. At least that might produce some lower level of institutionalized power and corruption. Without that, the system will never change because everything that is done focuses on maintaining the status quo and keeping power where it currently resides. Sad, but true. No way to change it without forcing those in office out of office every so often.


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

Instead of term limits just cut the benefits and perks the elected officials get. Limit them to strictly their salary from their office there would no longer be career congressmen/women.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

They just don't get it.


----------



## BigCityChief (Jan 2, 2013)

^No - and they DON'T WANT TO get it.^


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

Exactly! All they want is to control.


----------



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

One thing is for sure. They are scam artists and they absolutely know what they do. Nothing in politics just happens. And by accident happen absolutely nothing in politics.
They have the best proffessionals in any given field and area that Dollars can buy. They know exactly what they do and what the outcome on the street is. Nothing in politics just happen.


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

They can not actually solve a problem, if they do then why would they be needed. They have to have people believe they are trying to solve a problem with just 1 more law.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

tony pasley said:


> I don't remember who said it but an armed person is a citizen, an unarmed person is a subject. *the other quote is When the government fears the people you have liberty, when the people ear the government you have tyranny*


I believe this quote can be attributed to Thomas Jefferson. It is one that is frequently spoken by Judge Andrew Napolitano.


----------



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

> toni pasly
> They can not actually solve a problem, if they do then why would they be needed. They have to have people believe they are trying to solve a problem with just 1 more law.


Sure they solve problems. They solve their problems not yours or mine.

The most common mistake that people make is, that they think politicians want to do something good for the citizen. Politicians do what is best for the Big business, the Bank and if there is something in it for you and me fine, if not hahahahahaha...... Does anyone have a little imagination how much it cost to run a political party? I mean the have houses, apartments, offices, vehicles. The do training having events. Who is paying the utilities, the flyers and Romney or Hilary's campaigns? Who is doing the payroll and where is the money coming from.

A German Kanzler (President) Mr. Willy Brand SPD (Socialistic Party of W-Germany) said once (1982) in a TV interview. "... but that is not the question. I couldn't care less about the Yokels out there. The Yokels out there have no choice. We TAX them and they pay us regardless what we do, otherwise s/he goes to prison or we take their jobs and Bank account away what is even more effective. We have to consider what the Industry, the Bank and the Islamic Oil States do and want, because their money pays our bills. If we don't please them the donations quit and our party's regardless if right or left are bankrupt in a matter of weeks."

You will never find a politician again that is that honest and it was a Marxist. They claimed after the interview, Willy was completely drunk. And it's true he was a alcoholic. After that interview he became a new Nick name: Brandwein Willy (Brandy Willy). But it doesn't matter if drunk or not. He said once the truth.


----------

