🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <wcaspers.56.0000C669@bangate.compaq.com>, wcaspers@bangate.compaq.com (William Casperson) writes:
> >I feel the second amendment was created to prevent what I have
> >personally witnessed throughout the world including:
> >1)      the murder of defenseless civilians by serbian AND croat
> >        militias in yugoslavia
> >2)      the violent (clubbings and whippings) put down of peaceful
> >        rallies in china (many years prior to Tiananmin Square)
> >3)      the kidnappings and murders of civilians by police in
> >        chile, argentina, spain, morocco, and romania
> >4)      the beating by police of ethnic minorities in bulgaria,
> >        romania, hungary, argentina, and austria
> >All of the above incidents are perfect examples of how the
> >government can use and abuse its power when the populace has
> >no means to defend itself.........
> 
> >THAT is what I feel the purpose of the second amendment is for
> >and THAT is also the purpose the founding fathers had as
> >evidenced through reading 'The Federalist Papers'....
> 
> I could not agree with that more.  An arguement I can see posed is, "Gee, that 
> will never happen here."  My answer, no it won't, so long as there is a second 
> amendment.
> 

The arguement I am hearing is that if the victims mentioned in the above 
examples themselves had firearms, then they could succesfully prevent the
violence against them?  If the students in Tiananmin Square had guns, then
perhaps China would be a democracy today?  If the ethnic minorities choose
to shoot back a the police, then the police will can either retreat and 
forget about them or they can attack with greater force in increased resolve.
Which seems more likely.  There are lots of examples of people who did chose
to arm themselves and fight the unjust oppression and ended up dead.  They 
also were able to kill some of the oppressors as well.  Violence begets violence.

 
                                        Tim Damron



My opinions do not reflect those of my employer