It's the old west all over again! :w00t:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31683427/ns/us_news-life/
QuoteArizona approves bill allowing guns in bars
Critics of the measure say guns and alcohol are dangerous combination
AP
updated 2 hours, 57 minutes ago
PHOENIX - The Arizona Senate has given final approval to a bill that would allow people with concealed weapons permits to carry a gun into a business that serves alcohol.
The 19-8 vote completes legislative action on the bill and sends it to Republican Gov. Jan Brewer. She has not said whether she will sign it, but she has long been a supporter of gun rights.
The measure has pitted powerful groups representing gun and bar owners against each other, sparking a debate about whether guns and alcohol can coexist without bloodshed.
Critics of the measure say guns and alcohol are a dangerous combination.
"We don't let people drink and drive, why should we let them drink and carry guns?" said Sen. Paula Aboud, D-Tucson, who voted against the bill.
Supporters say they should be able to protect themselves and their families even if they happen to be inside a business serving alcohol.
"It's very important that criminals are now afraid rather than law abiding citizens," said Sen. Jack Harper, R-Surprise, the bill's sponsor.
The measure would ban drinking while packing and allow restaurants to deny entry to gun-toting citizens by posting a sign next to their liquor license.
The bill initially required that a bar serving alcohol also serve food, but that provision was removed at the request of bar owners who worried about uncertainty over which bars have kitchens.
Forty other states have approved similar measures, according to the National Rifle Association.
Former Gov. Janet Napolitano, a Democrat, vetoed a similar bill earlier this decade that would not have required people to have concealed weapons permits in order to carry guns in bars.
More than 127,000 Arizonans have concealed weapons permits, which require a gun safety course and background check, according to the Arizona Department of Public Safety.
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press.
Can we shoot the pianist this time round?
It's very important that criminals are now afraid rather than law abiding citizens.
:thumbsup:
People that go to bars deserve to be shot anyways.
Good idea...
I wonder, I'm thinking that in the Old West in many places guns were not allowed in bars, or cowboys/others weren't even allowed to carry their guns into town; had to drop them off at the edge of town before entering. I seem to remember reading about that kind of thing. Besides, I think the Old West is a bit overly "romanticized".
I think it's fair to say that in the Old West men always trusted Judge Colt and his jury of six to settle any and all disputes by way of a triggernometry test. Not wearing guns in town sounds like a myth. They might as well have not worn pants.
Quote from: The Brain on July 01, 2009, 02:10:58 PM
Can we shoot the pianist this time round?
Better hurry, Charles Aznavour is getting up there in years.
Forwards not back! You're under Obama now damn you, you're supposed to suddenly start acting European! :angry:
Quote from: Tyr on July 01, 2009, 05:57:23 PM
Forwards not back! You're under Obama now damn you, you're supposed to suddenly start acting European! :angry:
Isn't that backwards though? The total lack of vigour amongst European peoples is just fine over there, but it would have terrible results if it were applied in America.
When i lived in Arizona ~20 years ago they didn't sell booze on election day while the polls were still open. :huh:
Saying 'The old west may be a bit romanticised' is a pretty risky statement. Really pushing the envelope with such edgy analysis.
The law, though, is a good one. Tennessee recently did something similar.
Quote from: Lettow77 on July 01, 2009, 10:08:28 PM
Saying 'The old west may be a bit romanticised' is a pretty risky statement. Really pushing the envelope with such edgy analysis.
:lol:
Quote from: Lettow77 on July 01, 2009, 10:08:28 PM
The law, though, is a good one. Tennessee recently did something similar.
And that is good because...?
Quote from: Neil on July 01, 2009, 10:22:48 PM
Quote from: Lettow77 on July 01, 2009, 10:08:28 PM
The law, though, is a good one. Tennessee recently did something similar.
And that is good because...?
Tennessee doing it sounds like a reason for anyone else to NOT do it.
when people in norway get drunk they get into fights... when people in arizona get drunk they compete in marksmanship... <_<
Quote from: Phillip V on July 01, 2009, 02:13:35 PM
It's very important that criminals are now afraid rather than law abiding citizens.
Errr... Actually, now and thanks to this new law both criminals and law abiding citizens will be afraid from drunken fools with guns, isn'it?
Quote from: Alatriste on July 02, 2009, 12:06:24 AM
Errr... Actually, now and thanks to this new law both criminals and law abiding citizens will be afraid from drunken fools with guns, isn'it?
The measure would ban drinking while packing and allow restaurants to deny entry to gun-toting citizens by posting a sign next to their liquor license.
Quote from: Neil on July 01, 2009, 10:22:48 PM
Quote from: Lettow77 on July 01, 2009, 10:08:28 PM
The law, though, is a good one. Tennessee recently did something similar.
And that is good because...?
Drunk rednecks shooting each other. Win/win.
Quote from: Phillip V on July 02, 2009, 12:32:27 AM
Quote from: Alatriste on July 02, 2009, 12:06:24 AM
Errr... Actually, now and thanks to this new law both criminals and law abiding citizens will be afraid from drunken fools with guns, isn'it?
The measure would ban drinking while packing and allow restaurants to deny entry to gun-toting citizens by posting a sign next to their liquor license.
Great. Arizonans will only have to worry about gun packing teetotaller criminals in bars :D
Now, seriously, this seems a quite empty law then. First it would quite odd to visit a bar when you aren't going to drink at all, and second I guess most bars wil display that sign... or have I forgotten some factor?
soon they'll be too fat anyways. Guns no longer will be powerful enough to get through the layers of fat to do damage.
Quote from: Alatriste on July 02, 2009, 01:11:30 AM
Great. Arizonans will only have to worry about gun packing teetotaller criminals in bars :D
Now, seriously, this seems a quite empty law then. First it would quite odd to visit a bar when you aren't going to drink at all, and second I guess most bars wil display that sign... or have I forgotten some factor?
It seems the law is aimed at general/family restaurants that happen to serve alcohol, like T.G.I. Friday's, Olive Garden, Texas Roadhouse, Applebee's, etc.
Quote from: Phillip V on July 02, 2009, 01:22:03 AM
Quote from: Alatriste on July 02, 2009, 01:11:30 AM
Great. Arizonans will only have to worry about gun packing teetotaller criminals in bars :D
Now, seriously, this seems a quite empty law then. First it would quite odd to visit a bar when you aren't going to drink at all, and second I guess most bars wil display that sign... or have I forgotten some factor?
It seems the law is aimed at general/family restaurants that happen to serve alcohol, like T.G.I. Friday's, Olive Garden, Texas Roadhouse, Applebee's, etc.
Ah, OK. We don't have any of those no-alcohol restaurants over here (even Macdonalds and Burger Kings serve beer in Spain)
Quote from: Alatriste on July 02, 2009, 01:30:36 AM
Ah, OK. We don't have any of those no-alcohol restaurants over here (even Macdonalds and Burger Kings serve beer in Spain)
!
Quote from: Monoriu on July 02, 2009, 01:35:46 AM
Quote from: Alatriste on July 02, 2009, 01:30:36 AM
Ah, OK. We don't have any of those no-alcohol restaurants over here (even Macdonalds and Burger Kings serve beer in Spain)
!
?
.
.
.
I know that's not usually the case, and I have been told by someone that ought to know that at least Macdonalds Spain had to fight long and hard to convince US headquarters that by serving beer they wouldn't lose families and kids.
Quote from: Alatriste on July 02, 2009, 06:29:45 AM
I know that's not usually the case, and I have been told by someone that ought to know that at least Macdonalds Spain had to fight long and hard to convince US headquarters that by serving beer they wouldn't lose families and kids.
The kids actually would refuse to go if they couldn't get a beer in Spain.
Quote from: The Brain on July 01, 2009, 02:10:58 PM
Can we shoot the pianist this time round?
Yep. No longer do we have to content ourselves with just stabbing him :)
Quote from: Valmy on July 02, 2009, 08:06:31 AM
Quote from: Alatriste on July 02, 2009, 06:29:45 AM
I know that's not usually the case, and I have been told by someone that ought to know that at least Macdonalds Spain had to fight long and hard to convince US headquarters that by serving beer they wouldn't lose families and kids.
The kids actually would refuse to go if they couldn't get a beer in Spain.
Not pre-teens, but many teenagers would. In Spain usually things are like this:
First contact with alcohol often happens in Christmas family feasts when we are 12-13. Just a glass of cider or champagne (or 'cava', our national version). From then on, teens are usually encouraged to start drinking gradually some beer/wine with meals - but in my limited experience most teens at a burger will still drink Coke.
Quote from: Alatriste on July 03, 2009, 12:45:43 AM
Not pre-teens, but many teenagers would. In Spain usually things are like this:
First contact with alcohol often happens in Christmas family feasts when we are 12-13. Just a glass of cider or champagne (or 'cava', our national version). From then on, teens are usually encouraged to start drinking gradually some beer/wine with meals - but in my limited experience most teens at a burger will still drink Coke.
Sounds healthier than the wait until college and drink until you get alcohol poisoning method.
I remember going to the local pub/brewery in Lviv to drink beer when I was 10. My dad and his friend went, and so did I and the friend's son, who was also 10. Nobody batted an eye.
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on July 03, 2009, 01:49:54 AM
Sounds healthier than the wait until college and drink until you get alcohol poisoning method.
So you believe early moderate drinking in adolescence will reduce later binge drinking in young adulthood? Not rhetorical question. I wonder how alcohol should be introduced to young people.
Quote from: Phillip V on July 03, 2009, 03:10:28 AM
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on July 03, 2009, 01:49:54 AM
Sounds healthier than the wait until college and drink until you get alcohol poisoning method.
So you believe early moderate drinking in adolescence will reduce later binge drinking in young adulthood? Not rhetorical question. I wonder how alcohol should be introduced to young people.
No, it can only increase it I think.
Teens will drink themselves silly here just as they do elsewhere. The main difference I see is we don't drink alone that much. Drinking is a social thing.
Quote from: Iormlund on July 03, 2009, 05:04:27 AM
Teens will drink themselves silly here just as they do elsewhere. The main difference I see is we don't drink alone that much. Drinking is a social thing.
I remember when I was in Europe taking classes there was this Irish guy who would leave his last class at around noon and head to the bar and start drinking and by the time we showed up to party that evening he was already passed out. I never figured what the point was of getting so plastered during the day you missed the party that night.
Anyway drinking alone is pretty rare here as well outside of alcoholics I think...
Amusing Colbert skit about the same law in Tennessee:
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/238642/july-15-2009/difference-makers---doug-jackson
Kentucky not only has an open carry law but employers can't prevent you keeping a gun in your car while parked on their property. :punk:
Quote from: Caliga on July 17, 2009, 09:19:42 AM
Kentucky not only has an open carry law but employers can't prevent you keeping a gun in your car while parked on their property. :punk:
Barbarians. :rolleyes:
Property owners here at least retain the right to ban that shit.
Guns are bad. :mad:
When I got hired here the HR director was doing a dumb orientation thingy and pointed that out. He followed his comment with "even though it's legal, we politely and respectfully ask you to leave your firearms at home." :lol:
Quote from: Caliga on July 17, 2009, 09:19:42 AM
Kentucky not only has an open carry law but employers can't prevent you keeping a gun in your car while parked on their property. :punk:
You Southerners are fucked up.
Quote from: Caliga on July 17, 2009, 09:30:59 AM
When I got hired here the HR director was doing a dumb orientation thingy and pointed that out. He followed his comment with "even though it's legal, we politely and respectfully ask you to leave your firearms at home." :lol:
Meanwhile, Johnny snaps and brought his favorite 12 gauge to work....
Believe it or not there hasn't been a workplace shooting here for like 15 years, unless you count the guy who went into his ex-girlfriend's office with a gun, couldn't find her, and then took the business owner hostage and end up killing himself. If you count that, there hasn't been a workplace shooting here for like one week. :)
One week is nothing to scoff at. Better to be not shot for one week than to be shot sometime during the week.
Quote from: Caliga on July 17, 2009, 09:30:59 AM
When I got hired here the HR director was doing a dumb orientation thingy and pointed that out. He followed his comment with "even though it's legal, we politely and respectfully ask you to leave your firearms at home." :lol:
I'm not allowed to bring firearms to work. :(
Quote from: DGuller on July 17, 2009, 09:55:37 AM
One week is nothing to scoff at. Better to be not shot for one week than to be shot sometime during the week.
'Tis better to be shot at work then never to be shot at all. :)
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 17, 2009, 09:29:17 AM
Quote from: Caliga on July 17, 2009, 09:19:42 AM
Kentucky not only has an open carry law but employers can't prevent you keeping a gun in your car while parked on their property. :punk:
Barbarians. :rolleyes:
Property owners here at least retain the right to ban that shit.
Guns are bad. :mad:
Didn't Wal-Mart lose a lawsuit a while back because they didn't allow a person to carry in the store and he got mugged? :P
Quote from: The Brain on July 17, 2009, 09:58:12 AM
Quote from: Caliga on July 17, 2009, 09:30:59 AM
When I got hired here the HR director was doing a dumb orientation thingy and pointed that out. He followed his comment with "even though it's legal, we politely and respectfully ask you to leave your firearms at home." :lol:
I'm not allowed to bring firearms to work. :(
I'll take two to work next week to make up for it.
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 17, 2009, 02:21:29 PM
I'll take two to work next week to make up for it.
Don't bring your guns to town, Ed :alberta:
Quote from: Syt on July 17, 2009, 02:43:38 AM
Amusing Colbert skit about the same law in Tennessee:
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/238642/july-15-2009/difference-makers---doug-jackson
Now this is an eye opener -
QuoteAmerica's founding fathers were students of history and human nature and understood that all government eventually leads to tyranny, and that the only antidote was a well-armed populace ("milita" as the term was understood at the time). TN Senator Doug Jackson understands that gun control anywhere leads to gun control everywhere. What happens with gun control? In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million peaceful citizens who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated. China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 innocents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.
Do some people really think that way in America?
All Americans are created equal in the eyes of God. :)
Quote from: Monoriu on July 17, 2009, 03:29:32 PM
Quote from: Syt on July 17, 2009, 02:43:38 AM
Amusing Colbert skit about the same law in Tennessee:
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/238642/july-15-2009/difference-makers---doug-jackson
Now this is an eye opener -
QuoteAmerica’s founding fathers were students of history and human nature and understood that all government eventually leads to tyranny, and that the only antidote was a well-armed populace (“milita” as the term was understood at the time). TN Senator Doug Jackson understands that gun control anywhere leads to gun control everywhere. What happens with gun control? In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million peaceful citizens who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated. China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 innocents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.
Do some people really think that way in America?
Yes.
Governments are dangerous and crappy. But a random stranger with a gun is even worse.
Quote from: Monoriu on July 17, 2009, 05:02:38 PM
Governments are dangerous and crappy. But a random stranger with a gun is even worse.
Not if you have a gun too.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 17, 2009, 05:21:47 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on July 17, 2009, 05:02:38 PM
Governments are dangerous and crappy. But a random stranger with a gun is even worse.
Not if you have a gun too.
This is the kind of situation where statistics are more useful than theorizing. I live in a city of 7 million with (by US standards) very strict gun controls. Basically no one outside the police and the military has guns.
Last year there were around 50 murders. Number of armed bank robberies were in the single digits.
Quote from: Monoriu on July 17, 2009, 05:25:59 PM
This is the kind of situation where statistics are more useful than theorizing. I live in a city of 7 million with (by US standards) very strict gun controls. Basically no one outside the police and the military has guns.
Last year there were around 50 murders. Number of armed bank robberies were in the single digits.
Ok?
Quote from: Monoriu on July 17, 2009, 05:25:59 PM
This is the kind of situation where statistics are more useful than theorizing. I live in a city of 7 million with (by US standards) very strict gun controls. Basically no one outside the police and the military has guns.
Last year there were around 50 murders. Number of armed bank robberies were in the single digits.
You live in a military dictatorship, Mono.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 17, 2009, 06:16:47 PM
You live in a military dictatorship, Mono.
1. It was like that when we were a British colony as well.
2. Gun control is not a political issue in HK at all. There is almost universal support for the current gun laws. Even if we become an instant democracy, the gun laws will not change.
3. I really don't feel like living in a military dictatorship ;)
Quote from: Monoriu on July 17, 2009, 05:25:59 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on July 17, 2009, 05:21:47 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on July 17, 2009, 05:02:38 PM
Governments are dangerous and crappy. But a random stranger with a gun is even worse.
Not if you have a gun too.
This is the kind of situation where statistics are more useful than theorizing. I live in a city of 7 million with (by US standards) very strict gun controls. Basically no one outside the police and the military has guns.
Last year there were around 50 murders. Number of armed bank robberies were in the single digits.
Not fair. Honkonians don't need weapons. They flip in the air and kill 10 guys with one kick.
Besides, they can also dodge bullets, which makes owning firearms pretty pointless.
Quote from: Monoriu on July 17, 2009, 06:21:15 PM
3. I really don't feel like living in a military dictatorship ;)
Which is why you are content to live there...and that's really a triumph of government, no? When the government can convince you that things are at least decent if not good.
It seems asians have a higher tolerance for injustice than westerners.
How far do you have to push asians for them to rebel?
You take their freedom and they don't rebel.
What about food? That's the basic human need. Would they rebel if they are hungry?
Quote from: garbon on July 17, 2009, 06:30:41 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on July 17, 2009, 06:21:15 PM
3. I really don't feel like living in a military dictatorship ;)
Which is why you are content to live there...and that's really a triumph of government, no? When the government can convince you that things are at least decent if not good.
Well, good governance is the object, no? If we have that, does it matter how the government is formed?
Quote from: Siege on July 17, 2009, 06:33:36 PM
It seems asians have a higher tolerance for injustice than westerners.
How far do you have to push asians for them to rebel?
You take their freedom and they don't rebel.
What about food? That's the basic human need. Would they rebel if they are hungry?
Israel is in Asia. Israelis = Asians :P
Quote from: Monoriu on July 17, 2009, 06:42:14 PM
Quote from: Siege on July 17, 2009, 06:33:36 PM
It seems asians have a higher tolerance for injustice than westerners.
How far do you have to push asians for them to rebel?
You take their freedom and they don't rebel.
What about food? That's the basic human need. Would they rebel if they are hungry?
Israel is in Asia. Israelis = Asians :P
Israel is the Middle East. Middle East > Asia :(
Quote from: Savonarola on July 17, 2009, 03:13:44 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on July 17, 2009, 02:21:29 PM
I'll take two to work next week to make up for it.
Don't bring your guns to town, Ed :alberta:
The Earps can go to hell.
Quote from: The Brain on July 17, 2009, 09:58:12 AM
Quote from: Caliga on July 17, 2009, 09:30:59 AM
When I got hired here the HR director was doing a dumb orientation thingy and pointed that out. He followed his comment with "even though it's legal, we politely and respectfully ask you to leave your firearms at home." :lol:
I'm not allowed to bring firearms to work. :(
Neither am I.
Quote from: Monoriu on July 17, 2009, 03:29:32 PM
Quote from: Syt on July 17, 2009, 02:43:38 AM
Amusing Colbert skit about the same law in Tennessee:
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/238642/july-15-2009/difference-makers---doug-jackson
Now this is an eye opener -
QuoteAmerica's founding fathers were students of history and human nature and understood that all government eventually leads to tyranny, and that the only antidote was a well-armed populace ("milita" as the term was understood at the time). TN Senator Doug Jackson understands that gun control anywhere leads to gun control everywhere. What happens with gun control? In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million peaceful citizens who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated. China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 innocents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million.
Do some people really think that way in America?
Many Americans are extremely stupid, and think that personal firearms are somehow useful against a modern military. Not to mention that some of the figures and dates don't really match up. The Russian murder-state was already well underway by the time gun control came in, as was the German one.
Quote from: Tonitrus on July 17, 2009, 07:53:14 PM
Quote from: The Brain on July 17, 2009, 09:58:12 AM
Quote from: Caliga on July 17, 2009, 09:30:59 AM
When I got hired here the HR director was doing a dumb orientation thingy and pointed that out. He followed his comment with "even though it's legal, we politely and respectfully ask you to leave your firearms at home." :lol:
I'm not allowed to bring firearms to work. :(
Neither am I.
Yep, never trust the chair force with guns.
Hell, when I go on Wright Patt, the gate guards usually aren't armed. CRACK SECURITY THERE.
Quote from: Siege on July 17, 2009, 06:45:48 PM
Quote from: Monoriu on July 17, 2009, 06:42:14 PM
Quote from: Siege on July 17, 2009, 06:33:36 PM
It seems asians have a higher tolerance for injustice than westerners.
How far do you have to push asians for them to rebel?
You take their freedom and they don't rebel.
What about food? That's the basic human need. Would they rebel if they are hungry?
Israel is in Asia. Israelis = Asians :P
Israel is the Middle East. Middle East > Asia :(
The Middle East is part of Asia. The worst part of it. There isn't a single Western country in the Middle East, whereas in the rest of Asia there's Japan, and possibly South Korea. India is on the path to civilization, although still has a ways to go, and much of its population to disintegrate.
Quote from: Neil on July 18, 2009, 09:55:51 AM
Many Americans are extremely stupid, and think that personal firearms are somehow useful against a modern military. Not to mention that some of the figures and dates don't really match up. The Russian murder-state was already well underway by the time gun control came in, as was the German one.
And besides, some Russians did keep their pistols from the war. They used them mainly to commit suicide when they thought their end was near. Only NRA nuts could think that gun ownership could derail Stalinism.
Quote from: DGuller on July 18, 2009, 10:39:47 AM
Quote from: Neil on July 18, 2009, 09:55:51 AM
Many Americans are extremely stupid, and think that personal firearms are somehow useful against a modern military. Not to mention that some of the figures and dates don't really match up. The Russian murder-state was already well underway by the time gun control came in, as was the German one.
And besides, some Russians did keep their pistols from the war. They used them mainly to commit suicide when they thought their end was near. Only NRA nuts could think that gun ownership could derail Stalinism.
Presumably if the kulaks had guns, their martial spirit would have enabled them to stand against the Red Army.
You know, the old 'men against fire' nonsense.