Dictatorships start by taking away the people's ability to defend themselves. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao all did it. Genocides also occured shortly after gun control was established in Turkey, Guatemala, and Uganda. All of this occured in the
20th century.
Hitler said it best...
Quote:
|
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.”
|
The goal here is not to ensure that the people can replace the military. The goal is to ensure that the people are capable of armed resistance against tyranny in any format. Just look at how effective the resistance in Iraq has been against our nation; small arms and improvised explosive devices have taken a horrendous toll against our military. Tanks, fighter jets, and bunker bombs are useless against a resistance hidden amongst a population.
I'm curious as to what you mean by an "assault weapon." It's a junk term that's used to describe semi-automatic weapons that look nasty, meaning they have two of the following features: a flash suppressor, bayonet mount, pistol grip, or grenade launcher. If you mean fully automatic weapon, then consider that the National Firearms Act of 1934 already prohibits the civilian ownership of fully automatic weapons and other military hardware without a Class III license. Those are not easy to get.
Here's a better question: Why should people be denied the freedom to defend themselves? Why should I be restricted from bearing arms? We shouldn't have to justify a freedom; we should have to justify taking it away!