Thomas Heger wrote in
:


I see. But isn't especially the USA more than well equipped with
personal, that is supposed to provide security?

If so, why then should each individual be burden with that task, too.
In my country we usually don't carry guns around. I don't have the
feeling, this fact would lower my state of security.

Actually arms are dangerous - even for the owner

Not if the owner understands and practices firearms safety. A gun is no
more dangerous than a hatchet or chainsaw or a mower.

- and I don't
believe, that armed self-defence is the best of all possible ways to
deal with the problem of crime.

It isn't....but when it is the only way available......

If there are so many agencies, police officers, FBI, ATF, FEMA,
homeland-security, ..., why shouldn't they do something useful.

They do, but running around personally protecting everyone in our country
isn't one of them.

The problem I see, that these agencies are not really trusted, but
seem to be the former criminals, now with official status and better
weapons.

In some cases, that would be true in both our countries.

If that is the case, than your country is really f****.

TH




--
Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman)

Witnessing Republicans and Democrats bickering over
the National Debt is like watching two drunks argue
over a bar bill on the Titanic.....