[pretoriusB]

>Drugs are not an effective defense against an oppressive government. Guns are.

Yes, if you live in 1700. In 2012, not so much. And especially not at all in the US, which is HUGE, segregated into states, and the government has the biggest military power in history.

With a gun you're not even a match for the police, much less the government.

Actually, you only get to have weapons because the government allows you too.

If tomorrow the government decided to forbid private weapons, the writer would have returned his weapon pronto or face jail time or being shot by the police.

In that case (which is not very far-fetched) I don't see him fighting with his weapon for what he considers his right at all. Does anybody?

[kls]

With a gun you're not even a match for the police, much less the government.

pretoriusB, you have your position on this and I understand that, it's a hot topic, but from the sentence above it is apparent that you lack knowledge of tactical warfare. I would suggest you review the footage of the LA bank shootout, to get an idea of what two men with rudimentary tactical training can do. A well trained squad of 4 to 6 can be absolutely devastating and it is why guerrilla warfare is such a hard and gritty fight to endure for a traditional force. It's why we lost to Vietnam, superior firepower cannot compensate for strategical and tactical advantage. The reality is, that the US could be disrupted by as little as 10% of it's population resorting to guerrilla warfare and quite possible loose. That being said, there is still a need for the government to be balanced by fear of the people, Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia is not that far in the rear view mirror, and the evils that lurked in the hearts of those men is not confined to Europe, they walk among all nations and desire the same darkness. The idea of the right to self defense is not an antiquated notion, it may not be as sacred now days but it generally only becomes sacred when you need it, usually by then it's the most important right.

[pretoriusB]

Sure, guerrilla warface can be very potent, but I don't realistically see not 10% but even 1/1000 of the US population resorting to it.

>That being said, there is still a need for the government to be balanced by fear of the people, Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia is not that far in the rear view mirror

Yes, but those are countries were the leaders were elected BY the people. I mean, Hitler was elected into office and had huge support even throughout the war, and the USSR come into being by a popular revolt, and it too had mass popular support, at least in the first years.

>and the evils that lurked in the hearts of those men is not confined to Europe, they walk among all nations and desire the same darkness.

True. After all it was the US that dropped 2 nuclear bombs on civillians, conducted medical experiments on unknowing people, had segregation and racism issues until at least the 70's and that has invaded more countries than any modern post-colonial western country. And it's one of the few western countries that still has the death penalty, I mean, what's with that?