08-16-2020, 03:37 PM
(08-16-2020, 02:52 PM)hollodero Wrote: To be clear in advance, I usually see your points as consistent, as long as you presume that bearing all kinds or arms is a fundamental human right, or a fundamental american right. When I have different viewpoints, it's based on me questioning that premise, and it has to be.
But this specific point, I cannot agree with that. An armed populace is not a safeguard against tyrannical regimes. It might be if you assume that a vast majority of said populace is automatically opposed to a tyrannical regime, which imho does not have to be the case at all. Examples would be a bunch of african states, where numerous armed militias back tyrannical systems and murder opposing groups, often based on ethnicity, or other reasons. Giving people in those countries even more arms does not defy those tyrannical systems. It just would increase the death toll.
Is what I'd say to that.
Except those African nations do not have a centuries long tradition of personal liberty. There's a reason Russia keeps falling back into authoritarian rule, historically it's pretty much all they've ever know. What a Russian will tolerate from their government is not the same as what an American will tolerate. Isn't the standard trope about America that we prize personal liberty over the collective? Isn't the resistance from some to wear a mask, and their stated reasons for doing so, an example of this very thing? While I understand your point the comparison doesn't really stand up to scrutiny.
Quote:I might also add that mass shootings are really rare in Europe and from that perspective, I have to call them quite frequent in the US in comparison. But sure, that is a matter of perspective.
Much more rare, to be sure. The mass shooting is definitely a majority American phenomena. Freedom is inherently dangerous as there will always be some who will abuse that freedom. I'll take that over a place like New Zealand where you can be imprisoned for reading something.
