lovmuffin
Posts: 3759
Joined: 9/28/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
quote:
ORIGINAL: lovmuffin
The UK people demanded gun control. Yes I get it. But we're not exactly demanding it here. Ok, well some are demanding it and as far as I'm concerned I've drawn the proverbial line in the sand because I can see a slippery slope here in the US.
But the original post (with the link) that started the discussion was specifically aimed at the British and gun control being a slippery slope - hence the thread title.
Right at the top of that article, it states "Voluntary servitude has consequences." then heads the article with "A Brief History of British Gun Control (or, How to Disarm the Law Abiding Populace by Stealth)".
He ends up by saying -
In 2009 talks with the British government were started to devolve airgun laws to the Scottish parliament. If and when the Scottish parliament is given the power over airgun legislation the Parliament has vowed to ban the sale of all airguns in Scotland. In the coming years, England will follow the Scottish example and airgun registration and an eventual licensing system will follow. The slippery slope is now in a vertical freefall.
Apart from the fact that Scotland is almost completely separate from England in it's legislature, he goes on to say...
Am I suggesting that there has been some nefarious plan all along to disarm and subjugate the British people? Yes, partly. I am also suggesting that this is a cycle of government behaviour long recognised, one we should be paying attention to, and breaking. We KNOW what governments do; they acquire power at the expense of the governed. They do it slowly, almost imperceptibly, and usually for nefarious reasons and political expediency.
He explicitly states that "...has been some nefarious plan all along to disarm and subjugate the British people".
We the people, have been demanding tighter gun laws to include air guns.
Many also want to include BB guns as well.
Subjugate?? I hardly think so.
First off I think the article itself was aimed at US gun owners using the UK as an example.
The OP reads "Leads to an interesting history of a dissenting voice."
The interpretation of that seems subjective.
"......disarm and subjugate the British people? Yes, partly."
Certainly an argument could be made for partly but like I said, I get it. The Brits welcome their gun laws.
"I am also suggesting that this is a cycle of government behaviour long recognised, one we should be paying attention to, and breaking. We KNOW what governments do; they acquire power at the expense of the governed. They do it slowly, almost imperceptibly, and usually for nefarious reasons and political expediency."
I'll concede the UK gun laws, considering there is virtually no opposition to them, won't make a great example of this. However since I believe the article is aimed at US gun owners, it portrays something that would be considered draconian to us.
"......a cycle of government behaviour long recognised, they acquire power at the expense of the governed, nefarious reasons and political expediency."
would absolutely apply to other governments throughout history. Nazi Germany and The Soviet Union come to mind among others. Yeah, I get it, the OP used the UK for an example.
_____________________________
"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Unknown
"Long hair, short hair—what's the difference once the head's blowed off." - Farmer Yassir
|
RE: Gun control in the U.K. - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread