Half-speed version: it is every individuals responsibility to protect themselves, except when the government takes their ability to do that away from them, in which case it becomes the government's responsibility. If the government doesn't impede on your ability to defend yourself, and you fail to do, you have only yourself to blame.
Yeah, I got that this is your opinion. I strongly disagree because I believe in state-controlled justice and defence, not self-justice and self-defence. But I didn't reply directly to that aspect.
Yes, it is indeed a good thing when it means that it's a two-way shooting range instead of a one-way shooting range.
Of course it "leads to something." All authority stems from violence. Only a total sheep would advocate what you're advocating: letting terrorists kill you and your family because, oh, defending against it would be so violent.
You think authority stems from violence done by the armed untrained civil populace? I don't.
You can call me a sheep if you want, I call the way of thinking that everyone got the responsibility of self-defence very shortsighted and primitive.
First of all, that wasn't an argument - maybe you should look up the definition - and second of all, it means that you did the equivalent of saying "well, yeah, guns help protect people, but they don't make for a better chocolate sauce"... and I don't care about chocolate sauce, and I never mentioned chocolate sauce in my post, so why the fuck would I care about your chocolate sauce (which you pull out after three posts, three posts which I obviously erroneously assumed had something to do with the thing you quoted, not chocolate sauce...)
Yeah, typical german translation error because 'Argument' in german means 'point'. I meant point, of course.
I believe that guns don't help to protect people from a political point of view because it leads to more violence and doesn't help solving the conflict, so in the long run less people are protected. That is in direct answer to your initial statement.
Also you are the one who keeps talking about 'let them execute you' or them 'killing you and your family' (getting on personal level) in reply to my general claim that with an armed populace "The only thing that would change is it would get more violent, more deaths on both sides and more centuries or more to overcome the hatred if there is any chance at all." I call that mousse au chocolat.
I'll let you figure that one out.
No, I won't play your game. Say what you mean or not.
