On 23/01/2013 5:41 PM, gtr wrote:

> Assuming the USSR had not established gun control, what reason is there
> to believe that these dissidents would have managed to avoid being
> killed in their hiding places rather than in a compound with their peers
> somewhere a week later?
>
> Does somebody think that if the police came to get a dissident who has a
> gun, they just go away? Does that seem reasonable?
>
> As John Stewart pointed out the other night, the Germans came after the
> "French" and despite the fact that they had an army with jillions of
> guns they lost and many of them were killed and/or sent to death camps.
>


Maybe you have to consider the possibility that the people in some
cultures tend to be nuts. Maybe they aren't certifiably crazy in vast
numbers, but they have different cultural ideals. People often point to
the oppression regimes in the USSR and China as the evil of communism. I
have known a number of Russians over the years and I decided long ago
that it wasn't communism that caused the problem. It was Russians.
Some cultures, not just the Russians, seem to be prone to crime and
corruption.

The pro gun lobby will point to places like Washington DC and New York
NY as examples of high gun violence areas in places with strict
controls. For me, it is a chicken and egg issue. I would suggest that
the gun violence problem is the reason for the strict controls, not that
they controls are the reason for the crimes.