noddy wrote: it is directed at the claim that armed civllians can take on the establishment armies, which if it was true and obvious, then europeans and australians might be more pro gun for liberty reasons.
Well the US Civil War was an army against an army.
all i can see is drones and government wrokers making me go splat with hellfire missles, like some taliban goat herder.
im not so certain id see all of naps examples as part of that process, and im definately not sure i see the civil war as being a good example of it either.
i dont on any level see any distinction between "rose up as an opposing government as opposed to armed insurgency" because they are the same thing by other names.
I guess I don't know.
For this thread, I've been exploring the differences in cultural attitudes that may have an effect on the statistics. In the US we have almost identical gun laws in many large states as Europe has, and several times higher gun violence than Europe in those gun control zones. Conversely our states with no laws enjoy the very low violence rates we see in Europe. So there has to be an explanation.
As for rising up against a tyrannical gov't, it's just one justification for owning guns. People do it when they feel like, even in places like Syria and AFG. For me we are individuals first and citizens of a country second, per natural law. I'm under no obligation to serve a system, rather the system should serve me.