I did 2 tours in Iraq, and when I was there we allowed every Iraq to have an ak-47 and a clip of ammo. Now I remember going on patrol and having Iraqis tell me that when Saddam was in power it was not uncommon to go to school and see the teacher with an Ak slung around his arm or a student with an Ak plopped right down on his desk with his books.Point being first off all, an armed populace did not deter tryanny as witnessed by the abuses of Saddam and secondly, nobody was going up to the school and shooting it up.Crazy people by definition have to live on the fringe, but if everybody is armed then all of a sudden the guy with the gun doesn't feel too fringy
posted on 12/17/2012 6:28:05 PM PST
>>Point being first off all, an armed populace did not deter tryanny as witnessed by the abuses of Saddam<<
It is not about to spoil a rule.
Being armed is a relative definition.
Everyone in every society is armed to some degree.
In order to make rule work to deter tyranny people has to be armed as heavily as government.
US legislation rules out using Army to counter domestic threats so widespread firearms ownership seems to be enough deterrent from possible government tyranny.
In post-Soviet States and Middle East where fully automatic AK is a kind of home appliance in class of power drill and oven governments rely on tanks and helicopter gunships for a population control.
It makes their armed citizen as vulnerable as unarmed American before some future uncontrolled feds.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson