Why don't anti-gun folk propose totally dismantling the military and taking away guns from police too?

How would countries protect themselves from law breakers and terrorists from the outside world?

what kind of retarded logic is this

guns are bad when you have mentally unstable individuals who get guns easily and shoot ppl up

we obviously trust and consent to police/military having guns

we dont want lunatics to hold and shoot ppl randomly

Many places have police without guns, and the US didn't even have police before 1830 (they were founded for slave catching).

The US has not been challenged conventionally for a long while, and the military doesn't stop terrorism.

we consent to police therefore they exist

The government has killed around 50 Million folk since WW2, supporting them is completely psychopathic.

I personally see no problem with the Police and Military having guns. I mean its their job to have them. They also know how to use them properly and when. I also see no problem with civilins having guns, however they should be harder to obtain than in MERICA.

You live in a country that still has slavery, and you support it, so I don't know what weight your thought holds here.

The government has killed around 50 Million folk since WW2, supporting them is completely psychopathic.

cops keep me safe. they just caught a robber of a store that is just right across my block

wats psychopathic is advocating for anarchy when no one wants your stupid fucking system

we as a society consented to creating a government that does stuff for us. we also consented to having a group of ppl to maintain law and order. these r called cops

what we dont consent to however are ppl who want anarchy

so knock it off and stop spouting shit that no one wants

Edited 5/17/2016 02:10:14

You live in a country that still has slavery, and you support it, so I don't know what weight your thought holds here.

Who was that to?

Cata, denying that the US government is a killing machine that is responsible for millions of deaths while supporting giving them huge surpluses of armored vehicles, jet planes, and radioactive missiles , and holding the innocent folk to a moral standard that says that they are extremely dangerous and must be disarmed , is a extremely hypocritical position that has monstrous consequences.

can u stop ignoring me u twat

or do you like ignoring the valid points i make

how do you address the fact that no one wants your anarchy?
and that people want cops to keep them safe?
and that people want government?

Edited 5/17/2016 02:16:32

Did you hear a breeze on the wind?

Anyhow, comment was to Cata Cauda, with draft in Austria.

I'm opposed to people having guns on the ground that they aren't really necessary, same statement for police, I do think the police may need something like a handgun, but that should be the limit, which is identical to my stance on people owning guns for self defense, it should be limited to a handgun. The military is another issue, however. The purpose of the military is to fight other militaries over squabbles that failed to be resolved diplomatically. While I'm all for reducing military budgets, and taking a pacifist stance in global affairs, in the rare chance that the US actually gets attacked, such as in ww2, I do support having a small army with a large reserve corps that can be quickly mobilized for war. This means the military would retain its weapons, however obviously it should not be used against citizens of the state.

When I was little, I came up with an answer to end all world bloodshed: just settle your disputes with a game of rocks-papers-scissors. You can even do it by population, and draft folk into it, too, you can have rock platoons and scissor spies and paper psychologic warfare esquadrons, but noone listened.

ff to 2016, noone still listens to my great answer for world peace.

some courts do it to resolve minor disputes

Anyhow, comment was to Cata Cauda, with draft in Austria.

If you mean with "Draft" Conscription, then I can tell you that nearly no one in my friendcycle and people I know are against it. We are a neutral country, both politically and military and proud of it, so incase of nasty warmongers we need to save our asses on our own.
We dont see it as "Slavery" as you might do. More as sign of independence.

We are a neutral country, both politically and military and proud of it, so incase of nasty warmongers we need to save our asses on our own.

Yeah, I hear Germany and Slovenia were planning on a joint military invasion, but I think the fearsome Austrian military forces scarred them off.

We dont see it as "Slavery" as you might do. More as sign of independence.

No, it's slavery. It's dependence and the theode enforcing their will on you in the worst way, through making you serve for them and kill innocent folk in Afghanistan.

How is it not slavery that, whether you want to or not, you are given a job to do and if you don't do it, you'll be gaoled?

Draft is most definitely slavery, you are forcing the young to kill and die , and labor away for you against their will. It is a sickening thing, if you're in support of the draft, why don't you go where you want to send folk and fight yourself. You won't be missed when you return, torn asunder.

Also Austria isn't that independent, remember, they're a NATO allied country and help occupy with them.

Draft is most definitely slavery, you are forcing the young to kill and die , and labor away for you against their will. It is a sickening thing, if you're in support of the draft, why don't you go where you want to send folk and fight yourself. You won't be missed when you return, torn asunder.

Once I finished school I will go through the "slavery" anyway. Lets see if I am still alive in a year or so.