Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Mogadishu's fathers turn to the gun -- again

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by rchernandez, Feb 21, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. rchernandez

    rchernandez Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2005
    Messages:
    306
    Location:
    Memphis, TN
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070218/wl_nm/somalia_conflict_guns_dc


    An example of SHTF on a country-wide/regional scale. Note their "choices" for arms...AK's, mortars & RPG's! This must be contributing to the shortage of RPGs locally :)
     
  2. The Grand Inquisitor

    The Grand Inquisitor Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    791
    Location:
    Iowa City, IA
    Again, this is fuel for my arguement that large parts of Africa require serious and complete disarming. In the half century since the end of colonialism Africa has dealt with both genocidal oppression from corrupt governments as well as oppressive and harmful economic policies from the industrialized world.

    Having everyone armed in Africa is helping no-one, there is no "2nd Amendment" tradition and in countries without law, guns are merely another way for the wealthy and powerful to dominate the weak.
     
  3. jlbraun

    jlbraun Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2005
    Messages:
    2,213
    @The Grand Inquisitor

    You're going to get flamed for that comment, but before that starts:

    I have said several times that arms possessed by the peoples of Africa may not be a bad thing, for the reason that it makes the conflicts long, and visible. The death rate in conflicts where everyone is armed is in the range of perhaps tens of thousands every few months, but the conflict runs for years.

    Consider the opposite of we listen to the UN. Disarm everyone, an armed thugocracy steps up, and starts genociding their tribal enemies. Millions are killed in a matter of months, then a period of relative peace and stability sets in - and the UN cheers.

    And we in the West consider the latter state of affairs preferable because we don't have to hear about the genociding as long, if at all. Millions are genocided, but because it's peaceful now, that's preferable to a state of ongoing war with relatively low casualties.
     
  4. DMK

    DMK Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,766
    Location:
    Over the hills and far, far away
    This is going to be an interesting thread. Let me get some popcorn and a cold beer... :)
     
  5. go_bang

    go_bang Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    Messages:
    158
    Don't feed the troll.
     
  6. DMK

    DMK Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    8,766
    Location:
    Over the hills and far, far away
    Actually it's an interesting opinion. I can't say I agree, but I'm looking forward to seeing him defend it.
     
  7. vrwc

    vrwc Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2003
    Messages:
    57
    Quote:
    "Again, this is fuel for my arguement that large parts of Africa require serious and complete disarming. In the half century since the end of colonialism Africa has dealt with both genocidal oppression from corrupt governments as well as oppressive and harmful economic policies from the industrialized world.

    Having everyone armed in Africa is helping no-one, there is no "2nd Amendment" tradition and in countries without law, guns are merely another way for the wealthy and powerful to dominate the weak."




    That worked well in Rwanda and Cambodia

    Please watch innocents betrayed and check back in with us
     
  8. El Tejon

    El Tejon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    18,083
    Location:
    Lafayette, Indiana-the Ned Flanders neighbor to Il
    I like how the blissninny reporter thinks that "semiautomatic" AK-47s are being sold in the streets of Somalia.:rolleyes: :D

    The media cannot tell an automatic rifle from an automatic first down and yet they want to write gun laws.:rolleyes:
     
  9. Zundfolge

    Zundfolge Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    10,755
    Location:
    Colorado Springs
    Complete disarmament is impossible. The only groups of people you can be guaranteed to disarm are the poor, the peaceful, and the law abiding.

    Thats why all forms of gun control always fail (that is assuming your goal is to end violence ... if you're goal is to disarm the underclass that your jack boot might more easily find their throat then gun control is a rousing success).

    Read the essay linked in my sig.
     
  10. go_bang

    go_bang Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    Messages:
    158
    Well, he hasn't which so far proves my point.

    I fail to see what is so interesting about his opinion, since it's basically the same tripe the anti-gun crowd banters on about in the US.
     
  11. Lonestar.45

    Lonestar.45 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2004
    Messages:
    1,077
    Taking away the weak's only means of self defense doesn't free them from domination. The wealthy and powerful will ALWAYS have weapons.

    If you lived in that guy's neighborhood in the article, would you turn in your AK and allow yourself to be disarmed? Who would you turn to to protect your wife and children?
     
  12. ceetee

    ceetee Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,998
    Here is the key:

    What's that you ask? Armed citizens, seeing after their own safety? With no "government" to take care of them? (Sound familiar?)
     
  13. Optical Serenity

    Optical Serenity Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2005
    Messages:
    737
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    I do see the point that RKBA is only viable in a country that has a tradition of law abiding citizenry. Somalia, does not. There is no rule of law there.
     
  14. Vitamin G

    Vitamin G Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    934
    Location:
    Monroeville, PA (Home of the Zombies)

    An AK-47 costs $400 in both Mogadishu and the USA, but i can sponsor a starving kid for $0.23\day?


    Umm...
     
  15. romma

    romma Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    3,208
    Location:
    Southeastern,CT
    I wish I could buy a real AK-47 period. You know, with the selector switch!
     
  16. ArfinGreebly

    ArfinGreebly Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    11,690
    Location:
    North Idaho
    The Grand Inquisitor

    What??
    ***?

    Well, let's see, genocide in Africa has pretty much only happened to disarmed populations.

    Whoa! Let's get something straight.

    When THIS country was formed there was no "2nd Amendment" tradition. The 2nd Amendment was created to guarantee the RIGHT to bear arms. The right preceded the amendment.

    No, African countries don't have a 2nd Amendment, and thus no tradition for it, but the RIGHT of a man to be armed for his own defense -- recognized or not -- exists nonetheless.

    The common man in Africa recognizes his right to self defense, even if his government doesn't. You don't "fix" that by disarming the whole continent (as though that were even possible).

    Self defense is much much older than guns. Guns are simply today's tool.

    Now, expunging oppressive governments from Africa?

    I could get behind an idea like that.
     
  17. Zundfolge

    Zundfolge Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    10,755
    Location:
    Colorado Springs
    I believe the fact that Africa has no "2nd Amendment" tradition is a big part of the reason its such a hell hole.
     
  18. Vitamin G

    Vitamin G Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    934
    Location:
    Monroeville, PA (Home of the Zombies)
    I'm sorry, but i have to go back off topic again...

    An AK-47, which is plentiful in Africa, costs as much an one in America.
    Food, which is scare is Africa, can be had for $0.23 per day????

    Reverse supply and demand?


    Back on topic...
    It seems with all the hatred, bitterness, and generational aggression, that its really a choice between dying slowly, or dying quickly, or moving.
     
  19. bogie

    bogie Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    9,569
    Location:
    St. Louis, in the Don't Show Me state
    I call it the "Utopian Society" theory. If "guns go away" then people don't get killed.

    However, the way it usually works is that one group's guns go away, and the other group kills 'em all. Or at least tries really hard to.

    And in Africa, it seems they don't necessarily need firearms - they're not squeamish about hacking their opponents (or the wives/children of same) to death...
     
  20. Rem700SD

    Rem700SD Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2005
    Messages:
    541
    Location:
    South of Houston, TX
    Grand Inquisitor,
    The flaw in your, and in any gun control logic, is that by disarming a populace we can eliminate violent intent. This is impossible as these concepts are independent of one another. Where there is desire, one will find means and opportunity. As is well documented, guns are not needed to commit genocide in Africa. Any implement will do.

    Dan
     
  21. DogBonz

    DogBonz Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,068
    Location:
    NJ
    We have the bill of rights

    And the 2A because the framers believed (rightfully so) that these were the most important rights given to Man by his Creator (or by reason, or what have you) that were natural, and thus could not be taken away or given up, but only buy corruption.

    Therefore, if you believe that you have the right to keep and bear arms for the same reason, that in is an inherent right, so do these people.
     
  22. The Grand Inquisitor

    The Grand Inquisitor Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    791
    Location:
    Iowa City, IA
    I didn't get back to this because I wasn't available, not because I was fearful of discussing the issue.

    My opinion has nothing in common with typical pro-control discussion brought about in this country. Gun control in Africa and in the US having NOTHING in common.

    I'll admit that the idea of disarming Africa is utopian and nigh-impossible, but it is sound in theory. Also, it would be foolish to fully disarm a dangerous situtation and then leave it to fall trap to random club violence.

    The problem in Africa is not exactly guns--it's the mind-set that exists that is fully willing to use guns to resolve problems.

    There is a lot of talk here about the "universal right to self-defense", and while we can debate whether that is true, there is very little "self-defense" happening in Somolia; in actuality, there is more armed banditry and use of arms to gain positions of power over the non-armed. Problem is, is that this situation creates an arms race that will never end with peaceful interaction (which I'm assuming is what we are all working with as an eventual goal).

    I would disagree. While there obviously wasn't a tradition before the 2nd Amendment was written, there was a strong tradition in the colonies of civilian ownership of small arms and this tradition helped foster a situation in which civilians owner firearms and used them legally and peacefully. The 2nd Amendment is basically a covenant agreement between the government and the citizens that allows civilians to own firearms with the agreement that they be used within the laws.


    This will take us to places we do not wish to go, but I do not if there are a set of universal rights given to humanity, but if there is such a set of rights, I believe the first would be the right to life. The right own guns is by no means universal and written upon the cosmos. Rather, the right to own is purely an agreement between a government and its people.

    That's the idea. I think any idea that involves helping Africa would include a big reset button when it comes to most of the governments. Even the regimes that are considered "stable" are run by oppressive oligarches (see Gabon and Omar Bongo Ondimba, the "Dean of Africa" who has ruled since 1965).


    Also, I don't know why anyone would bring up Cambodia when it comes to gun-control, but Cambodia is one of my areas of study and the rise of the Khmer Rouge had nothing to do with gun control, but rather it was related to devastation of Cambodia by American bombing runs from 1968-1972.
     
  23. ArfinGreebly

    ArfinGreebly Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    11,690
    Location:
    North Idaho
    2nd Amendment Tradition

    Well, almost.

    There was a tradition in English Law of alternately permitting and requiring the populace to be armed.

    The covenant was not so much "allowing" the civilians to own firearms, but recognizing that the ownership and use of the means of self defense and protection of the general community was, as much as anything, a natural right. The Second Amendment enshrined this recognition and forbade government tresspass in the matter.

    The Second Amendment is not about the government's "permission" to keep and bear arms. It's about constraining government's historical tendency to restrict and abridge civilian ownership of arms.

    No.

    A right is not "an agreement between a government and its people."

    A right is a natural state of affairs. In this case it is a right that governments throughout history have often trampled and seldom recognized. It's not a contract. It's tightly bound to one's right to life.

    One's right to life is abridged to the degree that one forbids his defense of himself, his family, and his community.

    Governments do not dispense rights. They may or may not recognize them, but the right exists (as a state of nature, if you prefer) nonetheless.

    My right to my life, and my right to defend my own life, and my ownership of the means to defend my own life are not something I am required to negotiate with anyone.

    Governments arrogate unto themselves the "authority" and power to "regulate" rights, but this is an illegitimate assumption of said authority. It is not theirs by anything by the most craven of "decrees" by those who seize power. It is the right -- nay, the duty -- of the individual to do whatever is needed to claim his natural rights.

    Government will not willingly relinquish its hold, government must be made to do so.
     
  24. Professor K

    Professor K Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    358
    Location:
    The Streetz of Compton
    Well I'd be for complete disarmment too, if it was possible. But thing is, it's not. Read David Kopel's "A World Without Guns" essay. http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel120501.shtml

    Basically, even if everyone handed in all their guns, they could just make or get new ones no problem. I once made a gun out of a small piece of pipe from a pen, and a superglued .40S&W case with no primer as a breechblock (I could have used any other piece of metal that fit around the pipe like that, but a .40S&W case was available, so thats what I used.) I used matchhead powder, a piece of paper for wadding after the powder, some lead sinkers as the projectile, and more paper for wadding to keep the projectile in and build some pressure up. I used 1/8 inch of visco fuse for ignition. I shot it, and it recoiled 5 feet (it was just laid on the ground, I wasnt gonna hold it for it's first shot), and sounded at least as loud as a .22.

    My point is, one can make something to expel projectiles pretty easy. Do you need an AR-15 to kill someone? No, all you need is something like what I made with basic knowledge of how a gun works. You can take away all the guns ever, but people will still make more. The genie is out of the bottle with guns, and nobody can put it back in.

    Dave Kopel also even made an impossible scenario where gun powder stopped burning. Basically, without gun powder, you need muscle power to operate a weapon, thus leaving the weak under total mercy to the strong.

    But the other scenario is that airguns would have progressed more. Airguns were better than firearms basically until cartridges were invented. You could fire more without reloading, and there was no smoke. They were used as snipers in many black conflicts with black powder weapons. Today we got full auto airguns with almost the same power as a .22, which can easily kill.

    Your argument for "lol only americans should own guns cuz we invented the second amendment" is very flawed. It is a basic HUMAN right, that a man or woman has the means to defend itself. America did not invent the concept, it's as old as humanity, and America did not invent the concept of arms control among the serfs/lesser people, it too has been around since the beginning of government.

    Either way, guns are here to stay. Anyone that wants a gun or other deadly weapon enough will get one.
     
  25. The Grand Inquisitor

    The Grand Inquisitor Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Messages:
    791
    Location:
    Iowa City, IA
    In some ways I agree with you, but I would disagree in only a practical and realpolitik sense.

    The 2nd Amendment, and further all of the Amendments, should exist beyond all forms of control and should be the guiding lights of our democracy.

    Only the most drugged and mind-controlled think this is the case. As it exists currently, the 2nd Amendment and the right to keep and bear arms exists at the behest of the government. The very second that the government believes itself to be threatened by the populace, the 2nd Amendment will disappear due to some very unfortunate incident similar to the Tasmanian massacre which made way for the near-total revocation of ownership rights in Australia.

    It's true that if firearms were banned there would be new weapons devised---anyone who doubts such a scenario need only look to the nearest prison to see the bright new generation of designers of sharp, pointy things.

    I don't know why people are addressing me like I am an active anti-gunner----I'm an active shooter and very pro-2A, but I believe that the preservation of life is vitally important and is, in fact, more critical, than the right to own weapons.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page