Um, didn’t they prove themselves pretty decisively in two world wars? Whence comes this weird deflection?
And what makes you think that your tired and frankly offensive stereotype has any bearing on reality?
You’re assuming social conservatives are the only people with guns. In my experience, fiscal conservatives, libertarians, and even liberals - yes, liberals - own guns in similar proportions as the Jerry Falwell types.
In my own limited experience it has only been the vocal minority “elitist” San Francisco / Cape Cod / Manhattan liberals who are strongly opposed to guns. Edit: and a whole lot of conservative moms whose husbands and sons have had shooting accidents.
From the linked column:
"When I asked Cramer about his reasearch, he said, “The laws adopted by the Weimar Republic intended to disarm Nazis and Communists were sufficiently discretionary that the Nazis managed to use them against their enemies once they were in power.” In other words, they didn’t need to pass additional laws. The Nazis did pass a weapons law in 1938, but that only added restrictions to the previous law, especially for Jews and other “non-citizens”
The answer to ChrisBooth’s question is substantially “yes”.
I’m under no illusions about how effective armed mobs are against any trained and disciplined armed force. So no, I don’t think our handguns and hunting arms are preventing a military coup against democracy. But long before Mao Zedong coined the exact phrase, people were well aware that “political power comes out the barrel of a gun”. Whenever weapons have been reserved for the government or a social elite and the common people forbidden to posses them, the result has virtually always been tyranny. You might claim that the modern US, in which government forces are controlled by civilian authority refutes that. Frankly I worry at times that democracy in the US is continuing solely on inertia. If there’s any validity to the cyclic theory of the rise and fall of civilizations, then the parallels between the modern day US and the late Roman Republic are worrying. I wish we had a smaller standing army and MORE armed citizens, including licensed possession of full-auto weapons.
Personal self-defense is a perfectly valid reason to want to possess guns, and the example of illegal narcotics should be ample to refute any fantasy that they could ever be effectively banned.
I do not believe this is correct and I do not believe all Nato countries have a presence in Afghanistan. And those who do pretty much choose what they do. Spain has said they refuse to do any fighting, that they are not there to fight but on a humanitarian mission and so they restrict themselves to humanitarian activities…
If you have police, military, etc divided between supporting the authoritarian government and opposing it and you have gun owners divided between opposing the government and supporting it what you have is a civil war and I doubt small arms would be deciding the outcome.
Canada went to Afghanistan as part of the NATO operation, upholding our obligations under that treaty. Not all members of NATO have a presence there and, as sailor mentions, those who do, do not necessarily engage in combat.
Regardless of our obligations to NATO, PM Harper has pledged to withdraw our troops in 2011. Also, at that point, regardless of the situation. Assuming he’s still the PM and also assuming he doesn’t change his mind.
One of my cousins was in the first group of Canadians to go to Afghanistan. He’s a very high-ranking officer, and I trust his opinion on the issue more than I might trust someone else’s. His opinion was and is that the Canadian military should not be in combat there and should withdraw immediately. He also recognizes that isn’t likely to happen.
I also wonder at the description of the Afghanistani government as “democratically elected”. By some definition of “democratically elected” I suppose it passes muster.
We have no idea what issue could cause this hypothetical civil war so it’s kind of pointless to debate who would be on whose side or what weapons would be most effective in the fight. Presumably the social and political landscape would have to be virtually unrecognizable to us (“us” meaning US citizens of 2008) before this could occur.
…
My brother is a (ETA: Removed Reference) Canadian military officer. He would in no way EVER discuss any of this mission, or any other regarding matters with his family: therefore I’m sceptical.
The current Afghanistan government was democratically elected; what are you insinuating?
My cousin is now retired, I should have included that fact. He was a career military man, and has a degree in history, his special area of interest being the British adventures in Afghanistain in the 19th century. His comments were not meant for the media, but for an interested relative - me. I toss it out here for what it’s worth, since the prevailing opinion seems to be that our involvement in this operation is a good thing. Maybe he’s wrong.
I will accept the assertion that the Kharzai government was democratically elected.
Neighbours of ours lost one son in Afghanistan and then their other son more or less to grief over his brother’s death, not long after. I don’t see the point of it all, but then I never did.
I presume you mean a “militia”. Fuck the militia. Get your terms straight. I’d be surprised if you found an American citizen who didn’t feel the same way. I’m an army of one. As far as my family is concerned, You’ll have to burn me to the ground to put me down.
You know, what kind of fucked up assed question is this? Where the hell do you hail from, Russia?
You ever heard of an army of one? I’m an angry fucker and the threshold of my door is where it gets ugly. I’m fully armed and I’m locked. cocked and ready to FUCKING rock. You must have watched too many movies for your own good. I don’t give a flying rats ass who the hell it is knocking down my door,unless it’s John Law with some stiff paper and he better be holding it in front of his face.
Better bring the big guns, bitch.
Oh, I almost forgot. Stick your ham.
I vote.
And I own guns. I will contine to vote as it is my right to vote and own guns.
I’m a liberal AND I work for the government.
Battle? Who said anything about a battle? Once enough politicians get shot, the rest will start giving some serious thought to just how strongly they believe in… whatever started the conflict.
Then what would? Do you really think the US is going to carpet bomb its own cities?
To everybody else: Now go read post #26 again and keep in mind that there are literally millions of Americans who make Omegaman look downright hospitable.
For me to actually take up my arms against the government, they’d pretty much have to do away with the Constitution, or somehow do away with major parts of it without going through the amendment procedures.
In other words, some sort of junta or tyranny would do quite nicely.
I also suspect that any government or president that tried that would be in BIG trouble, outside of the hordes of armed citizens; the military personnel all swear an oath that says in part “I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same…”
The active duty officers that I know, and the retired officers and former enlisted men all are likely to take that VERY seriously. I tend to believe that in an all-volunteer military, men who wouldn’t take this oath seriously also wouldn’t join. I think at the very least, they wouldn’t fight, and many would likely take up arms vs. the tyrannical government.
And people who know something of military history are fully aware that the Canadian forces have a reputation second-to-none, especially in the present day. Nobody’s going to question the heroism and fighting prowess shown at battles of Vimy Ridge, Dieppe, or Normandy among many others.
I don’t see our military taking arms against our population and… I don’t believe anyone is getting a free ham no matter what they post on this thread.
I’ll put a C-note on the Canucks.
I think either party is equally likely, given a majority in the Legislature, and one of their own warming The Big Seat at 1600 Penn. Ave., just with different justifications.
Is it just me, or is the number of gun control threads on the upswing since November 4th?
Oh, and in answer to your final question: Yes. The U. K… France. Germany. Italy. Spain. The Netherlands. Norway. Sweden. Denmark. Belgium. Canada. Japan. Australia. New Zealand.
Just to name a few.
True story:
In 1983, I went with to the International Scout Jamboree in Alberta, Canada. Due (probably) to one of my patrol mates not doing quite the job on the dishes, I contracted a nasty stomach bug; the kind that could get you seriously dead in the Wilds without prompt, proper treatment.
Fortunately for me, the medical services were provided by a Canadian Army MASH unit. The treatment got me better, and the service was outstanding.
Whatever else Canada’s military may have (or have not) done in the intervening years, this Yank will always have a special place in his heart for the Armed Forces of Canada.
Damn. 
I guess there’s no point, now.