Let Freedom Ring!

[Crockett]

In China, people are taking to the streets to demand freedom.

The government wants to gradually become more open. The Problem is that public exposition makes it much harder for those holding power to reward supporters and punish/abuse those who complain. Free flow of information is a force for good.

Here's a story about a really important battle for freedom:The Link

I honestly love Democracy and trends towards democraticization, even in areas of the world where that may prove temporarily inconvenient for us.

That may be a little of why I really much more strongly value my first amendment rights over my second amendment rights. Maybe the second amendment is there to prevent tyranny, but if it gets to the point we are governed by those with the best weapons and most willingness to use weapons, I don't think it will be an upgrade of personal freedom. That's not what we see in Mexico, where some civilian groups are so well armed the authorities pretty much don't mess with them, or in places like Somalia ruled by enclaves of militia.

 

[NEWDOC2002]

Sorry man but your post is all over the place. How the heck can you coherently turn a democracy demonstration in China into a second admendment post comparing us to a Mexican cartel? You can start three threads if you want. The mods won't limit your post.

 

[Crockett]

I guess I'm celebrating our first amemdment freedoms and championing similar rights elsewhere.

I see second amendment rights as nowhere nearly so important. Second amendments rights advocates who see an armed populance is as a counterbalance to tyranny should definitely be worried about being ruled by the segments of an armed population who are best armed and most willing to use force. In a might-makes-right culture, personal freedoms are generally not enhanced. .

 

[Hookem123]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[ProdigalHorn]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Crockett]

On another thread it was intimated that if Obama were to infringe on second amendment rights he should expect to be assassinated. I'm just trying to follow the logical conclusion what Sharon Angle and other right wingers have called a "second amendment solution."

I think it would have been a good thing that genuinely oppressive governments like in Nazi Germany or Communist North Korea, officials would have to fear well-armed ctizens -- that's good. In a democracy where almost every citizen has power to vote, associate and communicate, and people are not subject to unreasonable search and seizure, armed people using violence to affect the political process is more problematic.

 

[Uninformed]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[majorwhiteapples]

Crockett:

I can normally stomach your posts but this one is way the hell out there and you are so off base it is not worth a thought out response The original post wasn't that well thought out to begin with....

Are you talking about Chinese Freedom, or your rights to own a gun and how we are going to overthrow the government and then something about Obama, not even sure where that came from....Happy Friday to all!!!

 

[mop]

Mexico is a PERFECT counterexample to your entire argument Crockett. Don't you see that Mexico is where we will end up if the government starts collecting guns? Law abiding citizens will turn in their guns while drug runners and criminals won't. That leaves us with police with guns and criminals with guns. See why that's a horrible idea?

 

[msdw24]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Crockett]

I certainly agree Mexico is not where we want to be. Thugs intimidate journalists there, limiting freedom of expression. Certainly if law-abiding citizens don't have access to guns it's a problem, since there are plenty of well-armed criminals.

 

[Coelacanth]

In reply to:

---

---