|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> On 02/25/10 14:55, Darren New wrote:
>> It just wouldn't get enforced. The federal government has no forces to
>> do that other than the military, and a fairly recent poll (like a few
>> years ago) asked "would you assist in wide-spread confiscation of
>> firearms from US citizens" of the general soldiers and about 70% said
>> they wouldn't.
>
> While I tend to agree, I wouldn't put any stock into that poll. Find
> soldiers (of any country) who've done nasty things, and I'm sure most of
> them would have years earlier said and believed that they wouldn't do it
> even if ordered to.
>
>
Prime them right, and phrase the question right, and even after they
have done nasty things you could get the same percentage.
What it comes down to is how easily the 'powers-that-be' can dehumanize
the people they want shot. Few would agree to shooting a fellow citizen
who is involved in an uprising to preserve their Constitutional rights.
Many might agree to shooting a domestic terrorist who is attempting a
violent overthrow of the local government, and killing fellow soldiers
and law enforcement as a means to that end.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |