"Thomas Heger" wrote in message
...
Am 05.10.2011 22:22, schrieb SaPeIsMa:

"Thomas Heger" wrote in message
...
Am 05.10.2011 15:43, schrieb SaPeIsMa:


Not to mention that the Euros have lived with that kind of "specialty"
for far longer than Americans have.
Which is why poor TH is so confused about who is what.

OK. But if you are so happy with the government, what do you need
these 'small guns, the serious protection you need ...' for?


I'm so sorry that you are so myopic
You are making a bunch of stupid presumptions
Who said that:
1) "small guns" are for protection against the government ?
2) "small guns" are NOT useable for protection against the Government ?
3) the government is some "monolithic beast" that can only be addressed
with BIG guns ?
- Government agents are people who may come at you individually OR in
large numbers
4) the government is the ONLY source of threat to individuals
- try criminals as an althernate threat
5) The RKBA is only applicable to "small guns" ?

Ok I don't understand the US society!


YES !
I agree you do not
But thanks for admitting that much
It's a good start

If a country has a certain population and has a government and all sorts
of personal, than this personal, employed by the country, should somehow
work for the country - and not against.


Well that's nice..
But what does that have to do with anything ?

A certain individual has a certain job in the large machine of the
society - say a teacher. Than the people pay this person to teach their
kids and that is what the person is supposed to do - no more, no less.


OK.
And ?


If they employ a policemen, this person should bring some sort of justice
to a district, because the criminals are prosecuted.


BZZZT
You seem to confused about the role of the police
1) The police do NOT "bring justice to a district"...
Instead, the police
- are part of the SYSTEM to enforce the laws of the district
- usually show up AFTER a crime is committed
- usually are used to gather evidence AFTER THE FACT
- possibly are used to track down the suspected criminal, and effect an
arrest
At that point the system uses prosecutors and judge to process the alleged
criminal and "bring justice" more or less..
Now the police may be tasked to keep the "public peace"
But in reality there are NOT enough police around to prevent crime or stop
crime in progress.
IN actual fact, most police are not even very good at solving crime.
As a matter of fact, there is NO EVIDENCE to support the thesis that more
police will result in less crime
Usually more police results in a "police state" which history has shown
is NOT a good thing...




That these personal does, what it should, you have laws, that tell these
employees, what to do (and what not).


Again with the nice theory that has NOTHING to do with the real world



These laws are figured out by the government, what in some respect belongs
to the personal, too, hence should make just and useful laws (and nothing
else).


More nice theories not connected to the real world
Not to mention the notion that government is MAYBE the servant of the
people.

That has been shown NOT to be the case in European countries, over and over
again...
As a matter of fact, European governments have proven themselves
repeatedly to consider themselves the Masters and NOT the servants of the
people..


If that isn't what happens, but the government tries to threaten the own
population, than we have a lawless situation, where government and its
personal only pretends to work for the people, that pay for them.


sigh

If you don't believe, you may read this (or type 'REX 84' into google)
FEMA Concentration Camps:
Locations and Executive Orders
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004...ps3sep04.htm#1


BIIIIIG SIGH
The so-called FEMA concentration camps are just another conspiracy theory.
And you'll be happy to find more of that ignorant **** all over the web

But for the sake of argument, let's suppose that this is true.
What would be, according to you, the BEST DEFENSE against such government
abuse ?
A defenseless population that is easily picked up and loaded into the
railroad cars ?
Or an armed population that is apt to shoot back at the government thugs
coming to load them in the railroad cars ?
And remember that there are over 300 million guns in the hands of about 80
million "households" with a total of about 100 million households in the US.
There are not even close to 5 millions police and soldiers in the US

How do you think 80 million ARMED people would respond to a few million
government thugs wanting to abrogate their rights ??
And don't forget that of all the people in the police and military, A VERY
LARGE NUMBER are conservatives who:
believe in the Constitution and what it represents
BELIEVE that they have a duty to their Oath of Service, which in part
states that they swear to defend the Constitution from enemies within and
without the United States.
Note that their oath is NOT to uphold the government
Their oath is to "PROTECT the Constitution from enemies both domestic
and foreign"

Do you believe that in their minds, a government wanting to abrogate the
rights of the people they swore to protect would not qualify as an enemy of
the Constitution ?

As I said, the Nazis are a dangerous bread.


Ironic how they were successful in Europe and not so successful in the US
Why do you think that is ?

Hint: Americans have a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT Mindset from Europeans which
makes it difficult for such statists to do what they like to do.



Btw- the word concentration camp is badly 'germanized' in
"Konzentrationslager" (from the original English roots), because the
German language uses a different linguistic picture, that is more like the
English word 'to collect' for 'sammeln'. In German you would say
"Sammellager" (English: Concentration camp), but not
"Konzentrationslager", because in German to concentrate ("konzentrieren")
means to think hard.

So these camps are an Anglo-Saxon specialty and first invented by
Cecil Rhodes.

Anyhow..
Size and location of these camps are a hint, that the intended inmates are
Americans, what I regard as a hint for a not generally trustful
government.


Who cares
The so-called "FEMA camps" are conspiracy nut nonsense.
Read this
http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...y/news/4312850

And the only people who are apt to end up in it, are unarmed and trustful
sheeple like you
Americans are neither unarmed, nor do they blindly trust their
government.


Thomas,
I hope I haven't been too harsh with you
But, I've been on these groups for a long time
It is so so frustrating to come across people who are so deeply ignorant of
history both theirs and that of the US, and of the relationship between
gun-control and people-control throughout history
Americans learned this lesson 200+ years ago and have worked hard not to
forget it
Europeans, with the possible exception of the Swiss, have not leaned this
lesson very well and seem to be doing everything in their power to forget
it. (And sadly the Swiss seem to be going down that path as well).

You do not come across as one of the regular trolls that come through these
groups to push the lies and distortions so commonly used by the gun-control
crowd.
You do come across as some who is curious, not very well informed, and maybe
willing to look at things from a different viewpoint.
IF you are truly interested in the subject and are willing to spend some
time reading up on this subject, you will find a whole slew of people who
will be happy to point to interesting material. They will also give you a
fair hearing if they believe you are NOT pushing an agenda