pbfoot
1st Lieutenant
Just a point of view, I live 2km away from the US and the political situation IMHO ( and not to offend anyone) is very polarized, it just doesn't seem there is any middle ground , 2012 will be a very telling year
Congresswoman shot in Arizona
- Thread starter Vassili Zaitzev
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
ToughOmbre
Senior Master Sergeant
Very true pb, much polarization, but the political polarization in the US had nothing to do with the shooting.
Unfortunately, the work of a demented, sick psychopath.
TO
Quite correct we had this with the Pim Fortuyn murder in 2002. An idiot killing a national politician.
I also agree that the gun laws don't have anything to do with it. As I said, we have strickt gun-laws, almost prohibiting anyone to own a gun. Still we had this guy killing a politician with a pistol that he got somehow.
michaelmaltby
Colonel
Thanks for that BikerBabe and Marcel. Also political assasination in Sweden of all countries ....
MM
MM
drgondog
Major
To Taxi and Bull - I have watched this, expecting it to ramp up as Chris noted for similar discussions.
I don't know if I have this entirely right when contrasting the difference in cultures bewteen the US and the rest of the world with respect to ownership of firearms.
I would say the first reason, going back to the beginning of firearms in the West - is that Europe was 100% dominated by Royalty - and The ruling class realized quickly that lives were at risk from hidden individuals who may have harbored a grudge - like a farmer barely squaeking by but being taxed to death... and from a Long way away!
Just wouldn't do to have Peasants armed you know..
Japan encountered them with first Euro contact in the 1500s and immediately saw similar implications. Immediate neutralization of Samurai close quarter combat skills by unschooled peasants.
In the US, we were away from British rule on a day to day basis and a large part of rural food supply was hunting. When the Revolution occurred many Colonials were armed and prepared to form a militia - and that was the fine point between success and failure against a superior foe. Our history has been one in which the rule of law was concentrated in the cities and as our forefathers pushed West, law was not often within 100 miles and we depended upon ourselves to defend ourselves.
Even today, I live seven miles away from the nearest law enforcement presence and have lived as far as 40 miles away. The only feature a law enforcement officer presented to me was the one that filed a report on a break in or a murder -
So, the in-house weapon is a bulwark against the lawless who could care less about the law - or at the other extreme the government that ultimately does not care for the law - in our case the US Constitution and ALL of the Bill of Rights, not just the selective one that appeales to the politician of the day. You may look to our 2nd Amendment as the one that supports the First - and all the rest..
While the remarks by Angel about 2nd Amendment 'remedies' if the ballot box does not work" were intemperate - they are a very pointed reminder that US citizens are not slaves to a 'ruling class'
At the end of the day - it is the onus upon individuals for one to be responsible for one's own self defense - no law enforcement agency is capable..
I don't know if I have this entirely right when contrasting the difference in cultures bewteen the US and the rest of the world with respect to ownership of firearms.
I would say the first reason, going back to the beginning of firearms in the West - is that Europe was 100% dominated by Royalty - and The ruling class realized quickly that lives were at risk from hidden individuals who may have harbored a grudge - like a farmer barely squaeking by but being taxed to death... and from a Long way away!
Just wouldn't do to have Peasants armed you know..
Japan encountered them with first Euro contact in the 1500s and immediately saw similar implications. Immediate neutralization of Samurai close quarter combat skills by unschooled peasants.
In the US, we were away from British rule on a day to day basis and a large part of rural food supply was hunting. When the Revolution occurred many Colonials were armed and prepared to form a militia - and that was the fine point between success and failure against a superior foe. Our history has been one in which the rule of law was concentrated in the cities and as our forefathers pushed West, law was not often within 100 miles and we depended upon ourselves to defend ourselves.
Even today, I live seven miles away from the nearest law enforcement presence and have lived as far as 40 miles away. The only feature a law enforcement officer presented to me was the one that filed a report on a break in or a murder -
So, the in-house weapon is a bulwark against the lawless who could care less about the law - or at the other extreme the government that ultimately does not care for the law - in our case the US Constitution and ALL of the Bill of Rights, not just the selective one that appeales to the politician of the day. You may look to our 2nd Amendment as the one that supports the First - and all the rest..
While the remarks by Angel about 2nd Amendment 'remedies' if the ballot box does not work" were intemperate - they are a very pointed reminder that US citizens are not slaves to a 'ruling class'
At the end of the day - it is the onus upon individuals for one to be responsible for one's own self defense - no law enforcement agency is capable..
Last edited:
