Please comment...

Yes. All knowledge gained from successes or mistakes can be helpful if it is properly applied.
There are some intelligent folks at this forum that will give valuable commentary...and some that wont.
Don't let that stop you from speaking your mind.

 

The gun obsessed don't even try other options since their FIRST and ONLY response to EVERYTHING is to pull out their guns which is a tacit admission of FAILURE to even be AWARE of other options.

 

I would say that a lawful, armed citizenry is what keeps many criminally inclined people from "solving" their money, drugs, girlfriend, car, neighbor and beer problems with guns. A lawful, armed citizenry is what makes peaceful protests possible. A lawful, armed citizenry is an essential component of a free and peaceful society.

 

That's completely false.

There's a concept that's taught in every gun safety class for those who want to carry a gun: escalation of force. It specifically addresses both the importance of exhausting all other options and the potential ramifications if one elects to not exhaust all other options.

Your statement is wrong...

 

Maybe not essential at all. There are enough societies on this list to prove otherwise...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country

 

Obviously those lessons are IGNORED by the gun obsessed!

 

Indeed. Their motto is shoot first and make excuses later.

 

Which ones of those allegedly* gun free societies are free from oppression by government, organized crime or other criminal elements?

*Many countries with no legal ownership of fire-arms have substantial illegal ownership of weapons by government, criminal elements and otherwise law abiding citizens. Those guns probably aren't included in your estimated statistic.

 

Actually only 5 of those societies listed are allegedly* gun free. Most are not gun free.
My disagreement is with this idea...

Perhaps...it may yet prove to be the antithesis of a free and peaceful society.

 

If you take an honest and open minded look at the available data you'll find that societies where the people are at liberty to own and use the means to protect themselves are more peaceful and prosperous than those where that liberty is restricted. This article makes the argument pretty well and fairly thoroughly: http://davekopel.org/NRO/2001/A-World-Without-Guns.htm

 

Can you provide a more neutral source from which to form an open minded opinion...at the very least a Wikipedia reference.
The link you posted is a website authored by this man....
"Dave Kopel opposes gun control and is a benefactor member of the National Rifle Association. His articles on gun control and gun violence have been cited in the Opposing Viewpoints Series. In 2003, Kopel wrote in National Review "Simply put, if not for gun control, Hitler would not have been able to murder 21 million people." He recently contributed an article to the 59th Volume of the Syracuse Law Review entitled "The Natural Right of Self-Defense: Heller's Lesson for the World." He appeared in FahrenHYPE 9/11, a film that disputes the allegations in Fahrenheit 9/11. Kopel's Independence Institute received 1.42 million dollars of funding for its activities by the National Rifle Association.
In that regard, his views may lean to far to one side to form an open minded opinion.

 

I bet “the Nazi’s” are mentioned for various reasons in half of all threads.

 

There are no neutral sources, although the John Lott, the author of the book "More Guns, Less Crime" began his research with an anti-gun inclination and was convinced by his research that he was wrong. Read the article. Kopel has a lot of references in the article but it isn't a research or scientific paper. It is definitely worth reading to get his views and insights.

 

With around half a billion guns in the US, if that were even remotely true, there would be a lot more shootings.

Thats a ridiculous overreaction.

Unless you're only referring to violent criminals who've actually attacked people with firearms. Are you?

 

Once again you move the goalposts rather than address the indisputable FACTS!

Sad!

 

Where did you think the 'goal post' was?

 

Lol...Only the illiterate ones.

 

The original goalposts were the INDISPUTABLE FACTS that it IS possible to achieve FREEDOM from oppression WITHOUT firearms but that obviously triggers Cognitive Dissonance for those obsessed with guns.

 

Possible, sure. Its also possible to survive getting shot. Its far more likely to survive getting shot if wearing ballistic armor. Just like its far more likely to achieve freedom if armed.

Are you certain that was ever the 'goal post'?

 

Thank you for establishing that cognitive dissonance makes it futile to engage with the gun obsessed with any expectation that they will grasp that there are FEASIBLE and WORKABLE SOLUTIONS to problems like freedom from oppression that do NOT involve firearms.

Have a nice day!

 

Of course there are.

But should they fail, theres also firearms as a last resort, unless we give them up...

 

And there goes the goalposts again jumping down yet another IRRELEVANT gun obsession rabbit hole!

 

I definitely set no goal on that one... It seems like you're setting unattainable goals for yourself, and blaming me you fail to reach them.

 

As I pointed out in a prior post the gun obsessed cannot conceive of anything that is NOT about their guns.

I even gave you a clue and it didn't help!

No one mentioned anything at all about "giving them up" but it was PREDICTABLE the kneejerk reaction that comes with gun obsession.

So yes, the goal of thinking of other SOLUTIONS that do NOT involve their guns probably is an "unattainable goal" for those who are obsessed with their guns.

Sad!

 

You started the whole thing suggesting that guns are unecessary in the pursuit of liberty. I merely countered that they are necessary if all other avenues fail.

I never said those avenues involve guns. Just that guns are the last resort.