Quote:
|
Originally Posted by nezmot
dksuddeth, the_dunedan - once again I fail to understand the logic of using a story like this to support your pro-gun stance. If the strikers mentioned hadn't been armed, and dangerous, the government boys wouldn't have had to open fire on them. It's yet another example of the right to bear arms ending in tragedy not to mention proving yet again that government oppression isn't stopped by arming the populace, it just makes it more brutal.
|
nezmot, if the strikers had been unarmed, what would have happened? the private detectives originally hired would have enforced whatever they wanted to because THEY had guns. It wouldn't have mattered at that point about rights, freedom, or anything else. A free people, exercising their right to protest were going to be oppressed. what is it about freedom and rights that you refuse to understand? Is government oppression better with unarmed citizens because nobody dies?
freedom isn't free and unless you're willing to use arms to defend YOUR freedom, it's very easily taken away. You might be happy living an oppressed life doing what you're told to do whether you like it or not but that doesn't make it right. You place the blame for the massacre on the strikers but why do you hold the others blameless? Is it because they are 'the government'? Is the government our supreme ruler and we are merely its subjects? If thats what you believe, maybe you are in the wrong country.
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."
Last edited by dksuddeth; 04-23-2006 at 11:36 AM..
|