Mike Brewer

This is from another board, and I'm just going to repost the link instead of cutting and pasting the whole thing. This is one of the best arguments I have heard on the "pro" side of being an armed citizen.

http://www.warriorswayar.net/forum/i...p?topic=1456.0

Look it over, and comment here or there. It's a good conversation, so let's get it going!

Ghost

i think that in a civilized society the threat of force shouldnt even be on the cards so guns shouldnt be needed.

besides its rare for someone to use force to win an arguement these days.

its more about stealing. and when someone steals from you there is no debating.

__________________
Skills: Numchuck skills, bow hunting skills, computer hacking skills.
Favourite animal: Liger, bred for its skills in magic.

“Anyone can give up, it's the easiest thing in the world to do. But to hold it together when everyone else would understand if you fell apart, that's true strength.”

John McCain promo vid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWS-F...eature=related

Tom Yum

Civilized societies still experience the threat of violence. And the only way to respond to that violence on the spot is by use of force.

Arguments can escalate to the use of force. Rarely is it the best solution to an argument, but it still happens.

Stealing of more than personal belongings, stealing of your health and your life too.

__________________

Love it, leave it or fix it.

Ghost

yeah but the post is saying that when you meet someone and they want you to see things their way they will either use force or reason.
its so rare that anyone uses force to make you see things their way. they generally just talk to you and are polite.

the thing i dont like is that the notion is that everyone presents a potential threat. which they just simply dont. 99% or even more than that in fact are just nice people.

my view is that you should be able to use any force you see fit in defence of your home. im not in favour of people carrying guns.

i just dont see the need for it. maybe its different in america, but in the uk it would just be pointless.

__________________
Skills: Numchuck skills, bow hunting skills, computer hacking skills.
Favourite animal: Liger, bred for its skills in magic.

“Anyone can give up, it's the easiest thing in the world to do. But to hold it together when everyone else would understand if you fell apart, that's true strength.”

John McCain promo vid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWS-F...eature=related

kingoftheforest

Well the way I see it is this. If everyone carried a weapon and everyone knew it less people would act out.

Now yes there would be some idiots who would do things but face it, if you tried to rob a place and you "KNEW" everyone in there was armed with something, wouldn't you think twice before doing it?

I have heard a quote and I cannot remember who to attribute it to but it went

"An armed society is a polite society". If outlaw weapons than the only people with weapons are the outlaws.

Japan has outlawed guns for hundreds of years and not to long ago in Tokyo the mayor of the city was gunned down.

As far as I am concerned gun control in my neighborhood means using both hands.

__________________
These opinions and views described above may not be the opinion of forum moderators or owners. These are owned only by this forum member protected by his 1st amendment rights. You do not have to agree with these views.

This punch is heavier than life.
Treat other people as you would like to be treated

[

Ghost

when did arming a society ever work.

Japan, armed, was incredibly violent, has anyone got a working example from an y period in history where this actually worked? be it swords, knives or guns.
if you can show its worked before id be more open to it.

__________________
Skills: Numchuck skills, bow hunting skills, computer hacking skills.
Favourite animal: Liger, bred for its skills in magic.

“Anyone can give up, it's the easiest thing in the world to do. But to hold it together when everyone else would understand if you fell apart, that's true strength.”

John McCain promo vid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWS-F...eature=related

Mike Brewer

It depends on your definition of "worked." If you mean "when did it work for the rulers," that's a different thing from "when did it work for the people."

I'd say it works far more often than it fails. Especially in terms of governments not being allowed to exploit citizens. In terms of modern civilizations, I think America is a pretty successful place. So is Israel, considering it's the size of New Jersey, and it's surrounded by hostile neighbors. Sweden's citizens are required to be armed, and the crime rate there is very, very low - gun crime is nearly non-existant.

There are tons of great examples for when armed societies worked, but one glaring example is important to consider.

When did an unarmed society ever survive?

Survival is a pre-requisite for "working" is it not? Unarmed societies have been a favorite prey of armed societies throughout history. Whenever an armed society (or one with superior weapons) encountered a less armed one, the path was pretty clear. The British Empire was built on such conquests. Do you suppose disarming altogether would have made it harder for civilizations to fall to conquerors? how much better off would we all be right now if everyone had disarmed their people before Hitler came to power?

Ghost

Sweden is unusual in that it is a neutral country,never been to war etc UAE to me would be a far better example.

You say you feel America and Israel are successful, in what way exactly? modern civilisations just means you think they are successful first world countries. there are quite a few of them around.

__________________
Skills: Numchuck skills, bow hunting skills, computer hacking skills.
Favourite animal: Liger, bred for its skills in magic.

“Anyone can give up, it's the easiest thing in the world to do. But to hold it together when everyone else would understand if you fell apart, that's true strength.”

John McCain promo vid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWS-F...eature=related

traveller

Hey
Waiting for my flight to the war zone and thought I would check in. Nice thread Mike -- always the discussion starter.
For what its worth, I agree with armed societies and most of what folks have to say in supporting them. There are many examples to list and I think the key societies are noted.
Someone mentioned not seeing it work in the UK, as I currently make my home there, I am not sure if I agree or disagree.
Everyday, I hear about a violent beating or knifing on the radio news, and there is even the more recent cases of shooting by youths who get weapons illegally. The most recent crime report I have seen from a constabulary friend of mine is that illegal guns are on the rise in many counties and especially in the Birmingham area.
I also know for a fact that police forces in the UK are having trouble hiring armed response officers. A Northants armed officer I recently did a training exercise with believes the main reason is because the laws favor the person shot instead of favoring the officer.
I personally think that a larger influencer on their problem hiring armed response officers is due to the majority of UK citizens being very unfamiliar with weapons and tend to see them as dangerous regardless of who uses them.
I know the last few paragraphs seem a bit away from the subject, but if more UK citizens owned guns, there would be more people who see them in a different light and the police would not only be able to find more potential armed response officers to meet their current needs, but also be able to meet the expected increase most officers feel will be needed for armed response services in the future.
Back to the main thread piece, I beleive completely in being armed and having my neighbors armed. When living in the states, I have guns in my house and guns I carry. My wife and teenagers know how to use them and handle them porperly. All of my brothers and sisters own guns and most of my cousins.
Not one of us has committed a crime with a gun, but a few of us have stopped a crime.
As for Japan, an unarmed Japan would have been just as violent. When Japan started to westernize they tried to disarm the population and suffered some of the most violent times in their histroy.
Sweden is actually a great example because as Ghost said they have always been neutral and don't go to war -- their armed society works within their own border and culture, and doesn't try to influence other cultures through force.
The Chinese populace is primarily unarmed and they suffer some of the worst government opression and crime rates around according to Amnesty Int folks, it is just very hard to get statitcs from their regime so we do not hear much about them.
In many African and South American countries people do still try to get you to see things their way through the use of force, and force is often the first option before reason, not the other way around as Ghost states.
In the end each society is different and the result of an armed society will differ. In regions with a histroy of ethnic violence, an armed society will still be violent, but at least the sides will be equal.
In societies that have a general internal peace if you will, such as the UK, most citizens will stay within the rules of using the guns and the ownership of a gun will not make them more violent.
Those who choose to use violence or the threat of such will use it whether they are armed with a fist and a bunch of bully friends to back them up, or whether they have guns.
Violence is NOT caused by owning weapons of any sort.

__________________
Luck is not a very dependable Lady!

Mike Brewer

How is America successful? Seriously?

Well, let's start with the fact that in just under 200 years of existance, America rose to be the predominant world power in terms of military and economic influence. Even with our current political issues and internal "culture wars," we are still a pivotal influenc on the stage of world events, and the economies of dozens of countries in the world (that have existed in most cases for centuries longer) depend directly on US prosperity.

I would submit to you that if you look at Sweden, you'll find an awesome example. After all, they are neitral. if an armed society was going to turn in on itself, wouldn't it be one with no external enemies?

Besides, do you really feel that it's America's external enemies that make gang-bangers shoot each other?

Come now...

Michael Wright

This thread is an example of why I joined this forum. The points you are all making, regardless of the side you are on, are so important. I think these discussions are very valuable and I respect all of your points a great deal.

I think the posts by Mike Brewer, Traveller, and Tom Yum make a very strong case that echos my own personal thoughts. I want to support Ghost because I am a peaceful man and I too am from the UK, where we wake up each day sickened my the growing violence in our country, caused by illegal arms. Tomorrow morning at 8:00AM I am teaching a Police Constabulary about Edged Weapons Defence, and I know that the same Constabulary votes next week on the proposal of arming UK Police Officers with handguns. The opinion I will be offering them, and the one I wish to add to this thread, is this:

An equally armed society faces the battle of good vs evil, with even odds. An unarmed society faces an unfair battle, where evil conquers good through superior force.

Thats my 2c.

Mike Brewer

Owning a gun doesn't mean a man isn't peaceful. Just like learning how to straight blast into headbutts, knees, and elbows. It just means he's willing to preserve his peace at a cost of evil men's lives over those of his loved ones.

Ghost

yeah but im asking you in what way are they successful in relevance to the topic.
I know they are successful countries but so is japan, uk, germany, france and so on.
i dont see the relevance. the only distinguishing feature is that israel and america are far more violent than the other places i listed.
Sweden looks good but i cant see how you can attribute their success with them being an armed society. youd have to prove a direct link rather just saying it must be because of that.
I would suggest its more like that a culture of nuetrality has had a tremendous effect on society and the standard of living may come into effect, government policies on poverty, education and employment. all far more likely contributors than guns in my opinion.

You have to remeber america is one of the most violent countries in the world, so i dont view these issues in the way you do as i dont face the same problems.
Carrying a gun just seems crazy and pointless to me, maybe in america it is more of an issue as more people have guns and you have one of the highes murder rates in the world.

__________________
Skills: Numchuck skills, bow hunting skills, computer hacking skills.
Favourite animal: Liger, bred for its skills in magic.

“Anyone can give up, it's the easiest thing in the world to do. But to hold it together when everyone else would understand if you fell apart, that's true strength.”

John McCain promo vid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWS-F...eature=related

Mike Brewer

You never said, "successful BECAUSE they are armed." You said "successful armed society."

Nevermind the fact that I believe that America is successful in economic, military, and domestic terms largely because of our right to bear arms. You cannot deny the place America occupies on the world stage, and you'd be a fool to argue that weapons had nothing to do with our getting there.

Israel, in my mind, is successful because it is a tiny, tiny nation surrounded by hostile neighbors who would like nothing more than to see it wiped out. Why has it survived? One, singular reason - weapons.

America is successful as a society.

At the height of the British Empire, it, too, was an armed society. Since "disarming" it has lost territory after territory.

If you consider "violence" a disqualifier for a successful society, then you need to seriously re-evaluate the criteria for most disarmed society. Incidents of theft and personal violence are, per capita, higher right there in London than in most US cities. Is gun violence higher here, sure. But in terms of violence - hey, it's everywhere. Violence is human nature, my friend.

The fact is, Michael was right. Guns simply mean good and evil are on equal terms. Without them, you can enjoy your moral high ground with an illegal bullet in your lung.

Ask treelizard about her experience with violence in the UK ( I believe it was in your hometown). I wonder if that incident would have been different given an armed "victim."

Ghost

you say america is successful because they are armed yet you havent addressed the fact that countries such as the UK, Japan, France and Germany arent armed, have less violent crime and are less distructive on the world scene.

America may be successful due to its use of violence, it also the most hated country in the world because of their indisrcriminate murder around around the world.

The fact is in america more people get shot in the process of being mugged, this probably due to the chance of the other person being armed.
There is violent crime in every country, we just have alot less of it than you do.

America may be successful economically, how do guns fit into this, or do you mean their huge international sales of firearms.

As for your reference to the British Empire, i sincerely hope you dont think that was a good thing. In the UK its a period in history we woud rather forget, on par with the 3rd Reich for germany.

Global domination by use of force is for savages, we are about culture. well at least we are trying to be. not stuck in some armed past where violence solves logic issues.

in terms of murder with a gun USA rates 7th in the world.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...cides-firearms

per capita you have the largest prison population in the world
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...ers-per-capita

Burglaries you have the highest in the world per capita
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...ime-burglaries
though admittedly UK is second but we are miles behind.

Rapes, you have the largest number recorded by any country and you have the 9th highest in the world per capita
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...pes-per-capita

Success is relative. I dont see the arguement that owning a gun lowers crime.
Show me some stats to prove it.

You also deemed success as being the ability for a country to dominate others. this is worrying and why the world is worried about america and their imaginary enemies.
Uk is not perfect, but heaven forbid we become like america where you actually have drive by shootings and need guns to keep you safe/fuk up other countries.

__________________
Skills: Numchuck skills, bow hunting skills, computer hacking skills.
Favourite animal: Liger, bred for its skills in magic.

“Anyone can give up, it's the easiest thing in the world to do. But to hold it together when everyone else would understand if you fell apart, that's true strength.”

John McCain promo vid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWS-F...eature=related