# Guns and the defense of liberty. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 12, 2013, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002 "2013-01-12T22:47:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/41 "2013-01-15T13:37:35Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > :rolleyes: Oh, Godw– Sorry if Godwin gets it wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Kable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kable)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/42 "2013-01-15T13:42:02Z")
> [@China\_Guy](#): > > How about a much more recent first world example, and dare I say, more of a relevant example: The siege of Sarajevo happened in the 90s. > [@](#): > > What about the UK? Doesn’t seemed to have turned into a jack booted police state recently despite confiscating pretty much all firearms. In fact, I would have to look it up but IIRC England and Wales have 1/3 the firearm deaths per capita compared with the US. I don’t think anyone argues that disarmament must lead to tyranny, just that it’s easier to oppress and murder people that are not armed. [http://lawreview.wustl.edu/inprint/75-3/753-4.html](http://lawreview.wustl.edu/inprint/75-3/753-4.html) ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/43 "2013-01-15T14:01:27Z")
So let’s say that we evolve into a society where guns are solely the province of the government. Then what? It might take fifty or a hundred or even two hundred years, but eventually someone in authority is going to realize that what the masses think _doesn’t matter_ anymore. That having 3/4 of the army on your side counts more than any number of votes from the proles. That the people’s “purpose” in society is to work, pay taxes, obey the law, and shut up and do what they’re told. That’s the inevitable result of creating a society where the people at large and the weapons bearers become segregated. It’s a fair description of the Confucian society of China, an example of what George Orwell called “\<\>horribly stable \<\> slave empires of antiquity”. You only have to look at the history of how the ancient Roman _militia_ was replaced by the professional permanent Legions, and the decay of what the right to vote meant (literally, _suffragium_) to see a worrying analogy. ---
**Author:** ![ed\_anger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/bbce88/32.png) [@ed\_anger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ed_anger)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/44 "2013-01-15T14:13:45Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > That’s the inevitable result of creating a society where the people at large and the weapons bearers become segregated. Absolutely no proof that there is any inevitability to this, look at the many current countries with heavy gun control. This does seem to be the American gun owner paranoia in a nutshell though. There’s a reason our army is controlled by the civilian government, and that checks and balances exist in the government itself. ---
**Author:** ![CJJ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecc23a/32.png) [@CJJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CJJ)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/45 "2013-01-15T16:14:31Z")
> [@Kable](#): > > How about the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising > [Warsaw Ghetto Uprising - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Ghetto_Uprising) [Yeah, about that…](http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/stop_talking_about_hitler/) > [@](#): > > Proponents of the theory sometimes point to the 1943 Warsaw Ghetto Uprising as evidence that, as Fox News’ Judge Andrew Napolitano put it, “those able to hold onto their arms and their basic right to self-defense were much more successful in resisting the Nazi genocide.” But as the Tablet’s Michael Moynihan points out, Napolitano’s history (curiously based on a citation of work by French Holocaust denier Robert Faurisson) is a bit off. In reality, only about 20 Germans were killed, while some 13,000 Jews were massacred. The remaining 50,000 who survived were promptly sent off to concentration camps. Seems to me a perfect example of how citizen-armed resistance to tyranny was not effective in ending it. Those who fought back should be celebrated for their bravery, but the example shouldn’t be used as a basis for public policy. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/46 "2013-01-15T19:44:45Z")
> [@ed\_anger](#): > > Absolutely no proof that there is any inevitability to this, look at the many current countries with heavy gun control. This does seem to be the American gun owner paranoia in a nutshell though. There’s a reason our army is controlled by the civilian government, and that checks and balances exist in the government itself. Just the example of every other civilization in recorded history; but somehow it will never happen here. Talk about American exceptionalism! ---
**Author:** ![mbetter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mbetter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mbetter)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/47 "2013-01-15T19:47:16Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > Just the example of every other civilization in recorded history; but somehow it will never happen here. Talk about American exceptionalism! I know, right? Did you also realize that **every single person** from each of those civilizations is now **dead**? ---
**Author:** ![CJJ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecc23a/32.png) [@CJJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CJJ)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/48 "2013-01-15T20:32:45Z")
One of the constant refrains heard when the DoL argument is raised is that citizens will take up arms against a ‘tyrannical’ government “when it becomes necessary”. What I wonder is, who decides when “it’s necessary”? Some yahoo on YouTube? Do we rely on individual citizens just knowing the moment (IMO a naive and foolish assumption)? Or do we just accept the fact that different people will have higher/lower thresholds for tyranny and just live with the ensuing carnage when your neighbor decides that some new law/tax is a step too far? Or should armed citizens be organized in a way where that decision to defend liberty is clear and legitimate? Maybe something like a “well-regulated militia”? ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/49 "2013-01-15T21:58:45Z")
> [@CJJ](#): > > Seems to me a perfect example of how citizen-armed resistance to tyranny was not effective in ending it. Those who fought back should be celebrated for their bravery, but the example shouldn’t be used as a basis for public policy. Are you suggesting they would have been better off without guns? > [@CJJ](#): > > Or should armed citizens be organized in a way where that decision to defend liberty is clear and legitimate? Maybe something like a “well-regulated militia”? Have you thought this one through yet? You want the government to regulate a militia, so that when the government becomes tyrannical the militia can fight back? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/50 "2013-01-15T22:11:33Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > So let’s say that we evolve into a society where guns are solely the province of the government. Then what? It might take fifty or a hundred or even two hundred years, but eventually someone in authority is going to realize that what the masses think _doesn’t matter_ anymore. That having 3/4 of the army on your side counts more than any number of votes from the proles. It doesn’t matter if every single citizen has their own automatic weapon; the military will still crush them easily. If they can get the military to crush the people, then the people are crushed and that’s that regardless of how many gun fetishists there are. And you also presume that all those armed citizens will be fighting _against_ the tyranny and not _for_ it, which is I think much more likely. Political thugs with guns aren’t effective against the military, but they are great for terrorizing and slaughtering their fellow citizens. > [@emacknight](#): > > Are you suggesting they would have been better off without guns? No; they are pointing out it made no real difference. ---
**Author:** ![CJJ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecc23a/32.png) [@CJJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CJJ)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/51 "2013-01-15T22:17:53Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > Are you suggesting they would have been better off without guns? I don’t know that they would have been or not, but it seems clear that the possession of guns here was not at all effective as a DoL against a tyranny, which is the point of this thread. > [@](#): > > Have you thought this one through yet? You want the government to regulate a militia, so that when the government becomes tyrannical the militia can fight back? Again, if the DoL argument is to be taken seriously, the question must be answered as to when it’s OK for armed citizens to rise up against a perceived tyranny. I see no sensible way to answer that question without recognizing some social authority who would make that decision; it can’t just be up to each individual gun owner. And we do have a system of federalism in the US, so it’s not at all the case that the government imposing the tyranny would have to be the same one well-regulating an opposing militia. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/52 "2013-01-15T22:20:00Z")
[QUOTE=Der Trihs] It doesn’t matter if every single citizen has their own automatic weapon; the military will still crush them easily. If they can get the military to crush the people, then the people are crushed and that’s that regardless of how many gun fetishists there are. [/QUOTE] Yes, definitely…probably why we were able to crush the Iraqi’s so easily, and why the war in Afghanistan only took a few months. And why the Syrians were able to crush the uprising so easily, and why the Kaddaffi Duck is still in power in Libya and the various factions opposed to him were snuffed out like a candle in the wind. Yup, if the military is involved the the people have zero chance whether they have guns or not. And I love the continued use of ‘gun fetishists’…that really makes your argument so much more rational and calm, and really underlines how the mods are keeping control of the incendiary language in these threads, right? > [@](#): > > And you also presume that all those armed citizens will be fighting against the tyranny and not for it, which is I think much more likely. Political thugs with guns aren’t effective against the military, but they are great for terrorizing and slaughtering their fellow citizens. Well, you presume that the military will be in lock step in crushing the poor citizens who don’t have any choice at all, whether they be armed or no, so it seems pretty even to me. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/53 "2013-01-15T22:25:38Z")
> [@XT](#): > > Yes, definitely…probably why we were able to crush the Iraqi’s so easily, and why the war in Afghanistan only took a few months. Those are resistance against a foreign invader, and a half-hearted one at that; much easier than fighting a native government with all the advantages in logistics and support and determination that comes with that. And they didn’t do what they did with guns, guns did them little good. It was IEDs and RPGs that mattered. > [@XT](#): > > And why the Syrians were able to crush the uprising so easily, and why the Kaddaffi Duck is still in power in Libya and the various factions opposed to him were snuffed out like a candle in the wind. The Syrian rebels have heavy weapons, and the Libyans had NATO helping them or they’d have lost. > [@XT](#): > > Well, you presume that the military will be in lock step in crushing the poor citizens No, I’m not; that was the presumption of the person I was responding to. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/54 "2013-01-15T22:31:28Z")
[QUOTE=Der Trihs] Those are resistance against a foreign invader, and a half-hearted one at that; much easier than fighting a native government with all the advantages in logistics and support and determination that comes with that. And they didn’t do what they did with guns, guns did them little good. It was IEDs and RPGs that mattered. [/QUOTE] 😛 Sure they are man. And it was all the IED’s, right? The guns had zero to do with it. > [@](#): > > The Syrian rebels have heavy weapons, and the Libyans had NATO helping them or they’d have lost. And they both started out with heavy weapons, right? Seriously, either you don’t know anything about any of this or you are handwaving to beat the band here. I’m going to be kind and say it’s the former, and advise you to do some research before making categorical statements about how guns in the hands of citizens mean nothing in the face of organized government and military. Pretty much recent history has shown pretty clearly that you are wrong…not that past history shouldn’t have shown you the same thing. Personally, I maintain that having gun ownership be specifically or expressly for the purpose of some low probability event like fighting our own government is pretty silly, but this sort of ridiculous handwaving that they would be of no use at all just defies logic. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/55 "2013-01-15T22:33:44Z")
> [@XT](#): > > 😛 Sure they are man. And it was all the IED’s, right? The guns had zero to do with it. IEDs and RPGs. And the guns had essentially nothing to do with it. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/56 "2013-01-15T22:35:39Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > IEDs and RPGs. And the guns had essentially nothing to do with it. And you base this extraordinary assertion on…? ---
**Author:** ![ed\_anger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/bbce88/32.png) [@ed\_anger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ed_anger)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/57 "2013-01-15T22:36:36Z")
> [@XT](#): > > 😛 Sure they are man. And it was all the IED’s, right? The guns had zero to do with it. In the second Iraq War, IEDs were used extensively against US-led Coalition forces and by the end of 2007 they had become responsible for approximately 63% of Coalition deaths in Iraq.[1] They are also used in Afghanistan by insurgent groups, and have caused over 66% of the Coalition casualties in the 2001–present Afghanistan War.[2] > **[Improvised explosive device](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improvised_explosive_device)** > > An improvised explosive device (IED) is a bomb constructed and deployed in ways other than in conventional military action. It may be constructed of conventional military explosives, such as an artillery shell, attached to a detonating mechanism. IEDs are commonly used as roadside bombs, or homemade bombs. > The term "IED" was coined by the British Army during the Northern Ireland conflict to refer to booby traps made by the IRA, and entered common use in the U.S. during the Iraq War. > IEDs are... ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/58 "2013-01-15T22:39:19Z")
> [@XT](#): > > And you base this extraordinary assertion on…? That’s it’s been pretty well known for a long time? In normal discussions about those wars one hears about the damage done by IEDs and RPGs; it’s only when someone goes on a “guns are for _freeedom_” kick that we hear baseless claims about how guns actually mattered. This isn’t the 18th or 19th century, you don’t fight a modern military using guys with rifles. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/59 "2013-01-15T22:39:43Z")
> [@ed\_anger](#): > > In the second Iraq War, IEDs were used extensively against US-led Coalition forces and by the end of 2007 they had become responsible for approximately 63% of Coalition deaths in Iraq.[1] They are also used in Afghanistan by insurgent groups, and have caused over 66% of the Coalition casualties in the 2001–present Afghanistan War.[2] > > [Improvised explosive device - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Improvised_explosive_device) The assertion is that guns played no role at all, not that IEDs were effective. Here’s the thing…if insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan could figure out how to make IED’s, I’m fairly sure so would similar insurgents in the US. Der Trihs is asserting that armed citizens in the US, contrary to their counterparts in several other countries recently, would be crushed by the government, and that guns play no role. Interestingly enough, insurgents in Libya, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan still seem to carry guns, despite the assertion that they are useless. Why would they do that? Just a fetish? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2013, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002/60 "2013-01-15T22:42:53Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > That’s it’s been pretty well known for a long time? In normal discussions about those wars one hears about the damage done by IEDs and RPGs; it’s only when someone goes on a “guns are for _freeedom_” kick that we hear baseless claims about how guns actually mattered. This isn’t the 18th or 19th century, you don’t fight a modern military using guys with rifles. You know what else has been known for a long time? That insurgents in all those places we are discussing still carry guns. Lots and lots of guns. And this, despite your assertion that they are useless. Again, I’m not saying IED’s are useless…pretty obviously they are very useful in asymmetric warfare. What I’m pointing out is your ridiculous assertion that guns are useless is the flaw, since pretty obviously every insurgent group out there carries the things. But you’ve managed to muddy the waters away from the point of all of this. Why are insurgents in those other countries able to fight against their government yet, according to you, similar ones here would not be able too? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/guns-and-the-defense-of-liberty/647002.md?page=4)