[geeks] 4th Amendment Gone

[Charles Shannon Hendrix]

Fri, 02 Apr 2004 @ 18:49 +0000, Mike Meredith said:

> > Of course they will, and you would think that history would teach them
> > that, and that they'd be worried.
> 
> I suspect things would have to get a *lot* worse for a US revolution to
> be successful. You need a good number of people on your side (and
> prepared to commit high treason) to have any hope of winning.

Don't write off the US military quite so lightly.

Are you completely convinced that in a revolution they will turn on
their own people?

You might suddenly find a great many of them changing sides...

> > Of course, that's why many of them want us disarmed.
> 
> Well ropes are more fun anyway.
> 
> Legal guns are overrated for revolutions ... they may make it slightly
> less inconvenient, but the most important thing is people. With a large
> enough number of people on your side you should win; without you won't.

The American Revolution was won with a tiny fraction of the base
population.

Further, only around 30% ratified the declaration or the first
government.

Most people were opposed or indifferent.

> You don't necessarily need guns in a revolution (the Indians managed to
> get rid of those 'orrible English without), but if you do need them
> there's always ways of getting hold of them.

True, but only if the production and grass-roots training and
indoctrination are not removed.

Taking guns away increases the ease with which the state can impose
control.

Even people against guns cannot alter a basic human fact: unarmed, we
feel vulnerable and afraid.



-- 
shannon "AT" widomaker.com -- [Well, I have entered the "metallic years." 
Silver in my hair, gold in my teeth, lead in my ass... -- Sheldon Hall in
the rescue list]