Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have been following the career of Qaddafi for almost 40 years. I am no stranger to middle eastern politics (my DD is in Israel as we speak)
That this could illuminate a question about gun control, is an interesting side aspect. I agree its not the main story line.
So is your argument that "gun control" is OK because if the Libyans didn't need the RKBA by law in order to finally revolt than the US doesn't either?
If that is your question then my answer to you is unequivicably, no. We have a 2nd Amendment that guarantees a Creator given right. It is not within the government's jursidiciton to remove such rights via so called "gun control" laws no matter how they and anti-gun activists may try. Putting laws into place enacting government control over what arms people may own does not negate the existence of the right itself.
"Gun-contol" is just a euphemism for soft tyranny. What they have over in Libya is hard tyranny. Anyway you look at it, tyranny is tyranny.
Do you really want to start splitting hairs about how much tyranny is acceptable in the USA? Or, if a soft tyranny will stop a revolution when the people have finally had enough, should that time ever come?
does gun control prevent revolution? - the Libyan case
Nope, what it does is gets the populace sneaky and they set traps for one policeman or one soldier at a time as they slowly acquire the arms they feel they must have to be safe. Never kill a cop or a soldier within 5 blocks of your own house. The strong arm tactics used on the populace around where the soldier or policeman was either slain or incapacitated will gain momentum for the revolution. The more oppressive the government gets, the more people will be turning against them. These are basic revolutionary principals.
AFAICT no libyan private citizens HAD guns before the rebellion. legal or illegal. They acquired them AFTER the rebellion had begun.
Which is my point. If a rebellion/resistance becomes necessary, guns will be obtained, one way or the other. Gun control laws are not really relevant to that.
Not sure what your point is & how its relating to the US. At any rate gun control, or better stated, gun availability has to be relevant to a populace that wants to arm itself. Just because Libya is managing without that access doesn't mean they wouldn't have been better served with it. Like as not if they had access to them they never would have gotten stuck with Qaddafi at all.
But hey, if you really think their way is better you can go there.
In Libya NO private citizens had access to guns of any kind. A situation far stricter than anything advocated by mainstream gun control advocates in the USA.
yet when the people were ready to rise up, somehow they managed to get the weapons they needed. From marches on army bases, to army units unwilling to fire on the people, etc, etc.
Discuss.
I'm going to have to challenge your first statement and ask you for a source.
(I've seen various reports that private gun ownership in Lybia is around 15%.)
Additionally, there are lots of laws that go unenforced so an "on paper" ban <> a real ban which you see here in the US all the time.
Despite the attempts to spin answers to promote given agendas, the answer to the question is that weapons are not necessary to carry out a rebellion of a united and determined people, willing to die for their freedom. No matter how despotic a leader, their underlying goal is to control the populace yet at the same time they require the very same populace to maintain a working state. When the state ceases to be productive no amount of arms will bring that production back to life. We have seen countless examples in recent years from the American south to the middle east... non-violent revolutions can succeed.
The is a old chant Chilean chant, "¡El pueblo unido, jamás será vencido!" The people united will never be defeated.
Despite the attempts to spin answers to promote given agendas, the answer to the question is that weapons are not necessary to carry out a rebellion of a united and determined people, willing to die for their freedom. No matter how despotic a leader, their underlying goal is to control the populace yet at the same time they require the very same populace to maintain a working state. When the state ceases to be productive no amount of arms will bring that production back to life. We have seen countless examples in recent years from the American south to the middle east... non-violent revolutions can succeed.
The is a old chant Chilean chant, "¡El pueblo unido, jamás será vencido!" The people united will never be defeated.
I believe it is a statement of great truth.
It just depends how dedicated the government is to their current course of action. If you kill and imprison enough of the most outspoken the others will eventually fall in line. Tianamen Square and of course Chechnya would be more recent examples I'm sure there are others.
Despite the attempts to spin answers to promote given agendas, the answer to the question is that weapons are not necessary to carry out a rebellion of a united and determined people, willing to die for their freedom. No matter how despotic a leader, their underlying goal is to control the populace yet at the same time they require the very same populace to maintain a working state. When the state ceases to be productive no amount of arms will bring that production back to life. We have seen countless examples in recent years from the American south to the middle east... non-violent revolutions can succeed.
The is a old chant Chilean chant, "¡El pueblo unido, jamás será vencido!" The people united will never be defeated.
I believe it is a statement of great truth.
Like I said, its not NEEDED, but it sure helps and, given the relative stability of our country for 200+ years I think it a pretty safe bet that civilian access to guns might just prevent the need for violence or revolution in the first place. Course I could be wrong but the fact remains that regardless of why, we have managed to remain one people united & undefeated for the majority of 200+ years, with guns in the hand of any who want them. While that may not demonstrate that they are better for a revolutionary army, it certainly demonstrates that they are not detrimental to a prospering society.
Location: Visitation between Wal-Mart & Home Depot
8,286 posts, read 38,917,443 times
Reputation: 7187
Quote:
Originally Posted by brooklynborndad
In Libya NO private citizens had access to guns of any kind. A situation far stricter than anything advocated by mainstream gun control advocates in the USA.
yet when the people were ready to rise up, somehow they managed to get the weapons they needed. From marches on army bases, to army units unwilling to fire on the people, etc, etc.
Discuss.
Wow. Is that hinting at / leading to the single worst and most ridiculous argument for more restrictive firearms regulation that the world has ever seen or are you getting at something else?
In Libya NO private citizens had access to guns of any kind. A situation far stricter than anything advocated by mainstream gun control advocates in the USA.
yet when the people were ready to rise up, somehow they managed to get the weapons they needed. From marches on army bases, to army units unwilling to fire on the people, etc, etc.
Discuss.
If as you seem to assert, gun control was helpful in keeping a tyrannical despot in power for decades this would seem to me to be a very strong argument against gun control.
In april of 17775 the British tried for gun control in the american colonies. we know how that worked out. NO gun control allowed in America is the best way to go.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
gun control history
NO gun control allowed in America is the best way to go.
