HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » I post this as an observa...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 12:42 AM

I post this as an observation (the guns/drones paradox)

(Preface: this possibly veers into Meta and/or RKBA, so if a host wants to lock this I understand.)

I understand that there are people who

A: Believe they should be able to have guns that are "competitive" with the guns law enforcement and the military have,

or,

B: Believe that A: is a paranoid fantasy

I understand also that there are people who

C: Believe the government would use drones to rain death on US citizens within the US,

or

D: Believe that C: is a paranoid fantasy.

What surprises me is that as far as I can tell, at least on DU, the people who believe B: for the most part believe C:, and the people who believe A: for the most part believe D:. So something tells me that there is more at stake here than the relative tactical power of the civilian population compared to the government. It strikes me that if you think the government may start offing Americans right and left, it would behoove Americans to arm themselves, but I haven't seen a poster espouse both of those beliefs. It also strikes me that if you think it's absurd for a US citizen to even contemplate having to fight against his own government, you would also have to believe that government isn't going to wage war against its own citizens -- I actually think there probably are a lot of DUers who believe this, but they don't post on gun or drone threads that much.

Anyways, I'm just surprised at the DU mood about drones, given the DU mood about guns in civilian hands.

6 replies, 667 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply I post this as an observation (the guns/drones paradox) (Original post)
Recursion Feb 2013 OP
Electric Monk Feb 2013 #1
Eleanors38 Feb 2013 #2
Fumesucker Feb 2013 #5
intaglio Feb 2013 #3
patrice Feb 2013 #4
EastKYLiberal Feb 2013 #6

Response to Recursion (Original post)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 12:55 AM

1. Arming yourself to physically defend yourself from government troops or drones is futile.

Last edited Thu Feb 21, 2013, 05:00 PM - Edit history (1)

You will still be outgunned and outmanned no matter how big your personal stockpile is, if the gov't decides you're an enemy worth taking out.

So, I guess you could say I'm in the B & C camp. The possibility of using drones to kill domestically sometime in the future is not zero.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Electric Monk (Reply #1)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 01:51 AM

2. ...Algeria, Cuba, Vietnam/Indo-China, Iraq, Afghanistan, Afghanistan again, Syria...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #2)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 05:21 AM

5. From Jeff Davis to Jesse James to Bonnie and Clyde to David Koresh to Chris Dorner

Those who get into violent confrontations domestically with the the US government come out on the losing end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Original post)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 02:08 AM

3. You are using false dichotomies

because the positions outlined are the extreme ends of a wide spectra of belief. Additionally you are saying that certain persons believe others to be mad, implanting the idea that those with that last belief are insulting those with the inverse belief.

This thread is flame-bait, possibly deliberate flame-bait. I suggest you close it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Original post)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 04:12 AM

4. Your logic doesn't work for me:

If I think wanting to own guns that are competitive with police and military is a fantasy, I must think government would use drones on US citizens.

If I think wanting to own guns that are competitive with police and military is not a fantasy, I must think that government using drones on US citizens is a fantasy.

Aside from the fact that I don't get the logical connections, B + C and A + D, and it seems more logical to think the possibilities, as you have defined them are, B + D and A + C, there are several other variations on the factions in this issue.

For a significant minority, it doesn't have anything to do with what the government will or will not do to gun owners; it's about safety in their, mostly urban, neighborhoods and social places. Generations of social and economic injustice have produced some severely at risk and dysfunctional cohorts, many of whom have all kinds of access to un- and under-regulated gun sources and, then, there's another layer around them that consists of those who have armed themselves, more or less legally, because of the first group I referred to in this paragraph.

For another significant minority, it isn't about gun ownership and what government will or will not do to gun owners; it's about laws that are on the books, that aren't being enforced and may need some improvement, because of crazy wild gun markets pumping guns, especially assault weapons, into, and destabilizing, troubled places around the world, including countries south of our border from which we are receiving a steady flow of immigrants, some of whom are fleeing their troubled and very violent nations. All of these big, private, unregulated gun/assault weapons markets all over the world can also likely result in terrorism in nations with which the US can and does have treaty obligations, which means that weapons-enriched situations can result, for which some domestic political powers could seek the involvement of OUR soldiers abroad, in places like Benghazi, or Iran, or Syria, or, if not OUR troops, then our drones to respond to destabilizations made possible by or in response to our weapons trade in the region.

Yeah, it bugs me that there are people in this country who would start a civil war for all intents and purposes exclusively for gun ownership. I don't like the fact that they think they have the right to bring all of that violence and decades of pain and suffering to so many other people, without even asking them if whatever is a worthy cause, but I consider the 2 scenarios sketched above much more probable and much more difficult to come to somekind of collective agreement about than I do your gun-owners vs domestic drones scenarios.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Original post)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 05:25 AM

6. I believe both are paranoid fantasies.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread