Reply #87: why do you ask, gentle reader? [View All]

[iverglas]

"a ban on person<al> firearm ownership, as some here on DU are advocating (you?)"

Stopped beating your dog yet?

Or are you perhaps considering stopping asking "questions" to which you know or must absolutely and unavoidably be deemed to know the answer, it having been given repeatedly, complete with details well beyond the yes/no point?


"Could he do so now? Nope. (Besides the fact that he is dead)"

Might he stand on US soil and look around him at the carnage wrought by those personal firearms, and realize that the masses themselves were doing such a find job of accomplishing what the oppressors wanted -- ensuring that the masses live in fear, and ensuring that they never challenged or rose up against the real causes and sources of their problems -- that the firearms in the hands of the masses were really in the hands of the oppressors? That the masses were simply acting as proxies for those oppressors and doing their dirty work for them? That the oppressors would have no reason to disarm the masses, because as long as the masses were busy shooting at and being afraid of one another, the oppressors had nothing at all to fear?

Um ... I'll say "yes".


This all reminds me of one of my favourite Phil Ochs songs.

http://www.geocities.com/Nashville/3448/bound.html

BOUND FOR GLORY (The Story of Woody Guthrie)
(PHIL OCHS) (1963)

Now they sing out his praises on every distant shore,
But so few remember what he was fightin' for.
Oh why sing the songs and forget about the aim,
He wrote them for a reason, why not sing them for the same?


Pressing George Orwell, or many of the other names in this thread, into service on behalf of a theory and practice of society that it is completely false to attribute to them, and that is completely inconsistent with their own goals and beliefs, is offensive in the extreme.

.