[dalnecymync]

Firstly, let's get something straight. You're bringing up both Britain and gun control here... not me.

I did no such thing, i was replying to a post which questioned my reasons for not feeling the need to protect my home with deadly force. If you read it in context to the posts that came before it, that much is obvious, i never made it the main topic of discussion.

Secondly, I disagree with you. The most basic tenet of human existence is the ability to defend oneself. It is the most basic right a living organism has, because without it, no other rights exist.

I don't dispute this fact, so i find it strange you bring this up, i never implied that anyone should have to give up such rights either, so that whole paragraph is somewhat overly dramatic and actually has nothing to do with what i said.

Restrictions on ownership and use of firearms are not the disease, they are merely a symptom of a wider problem - the relinquishment (willful or forced) of this most fundamental right to an outside authority. That is why within 50 years rules can progress from limiting access to some firearms for some people, to prohibition of all firearms, to prohibition of pocketknives, to [what now essentially amounts to] a prohibition of the use of force. But even that is not the core concept, since an even more general problem exists: the abdication of one's responsibility for personal well-being.

It's kind of you to share your opinion with me, but that's all it is Gnius, your opinion, and it's one that's coloured by the country you were raised in. My countries history tells me a different story, and i'm sure many other countries stories would differ from my own, but all of them colour our perception of society and what is best for society as a whole.

When threatened by an animal or a stranger, a child will grab a stick or a rock to defend him/herself instinctively. That is the reaction that many places in the world are actively attempting to breed out of the population, without realizing the magnitude of the effect.

Actually not, it can be Fight or Flight, those are natural reactions to being threatened, the initial overpowering feeling is to run (especially true to children), fighting becomes our choice when flight is impossible.

It staggers me that you seem to think teaching future generations that violence is not the answer to violence is wrong, you keep talking about the base instincts of animals, but i'd like to think that we've come further than merely reacting to our base instincts, like an animal.

When you strip a person of the responsibility to take care of themselves, you actively encourage them to surrender, and even assertively relinquish their willingness to do so. Ultimately, such an action deprives them of the ability to protect their interests.

Hardly, you think because i can't legally own a handgun, i have relinquished my willingness to protect my self or my family? Utterly preposterous notion.

You only seem to able to see things from your own point of view, so let's clarify something, the reason you feel more of a need to protect yourselves with guns is because you are more likely to be attacked by someone with a gun. In the UK that is not such a big issue or worry to most, so we don't see owning a firearm as an essential part of being able to defend ourselves, since the chances of being attacked by a criminal with a gun is very low.

On a global scale, that explains why an extremist Muslim minority (which is a minority of a minority) commands such power in much of modern Europe. They are willing to use force and threat of force to attain their goals, while their opponents (political, religious, or physical) are unwilling, and close to incapable of doing so, even in self-defense.

What on earth does this actually have to do with anything i've said? You appear to be going off on a tangent, anyone would think we have terrorists running amok in the streets.

Everything you've just said in the above paragraph just comes across to me as paranoid and overly dramatic, like you are trying to incite a sense of fear, rather than stating any valid reasoning behind what your saying, you didn't work for the Bush JR administration did you?

A broader societal impact of aggressively pursuing a psychology of dependence and prohibition of self-reliance, is a gradual but inevitable alteration in the societal ratio between the producers and the consumers, a change that will likely be as poisonous to the Western economic system, as the class struggle... and is even more likely than class struggle to lead to the societal downfall, as an increasing proportion of the population accepts sufficient entitlements to be assured of their well-being, and grows to resent applying any effort to maintaining their lifestyle.

It seems your lack of actually being able to see or understand that we don't share the same history as you, means we don't hold the same values, how you interpret what important in a society is defined by (amongst other things) how your ancestors won your freedom in the past, but it's not relevant to our society, you are taking your understanding of what freedom is and means and blanketing the whole of the world in it. For example, i could say that an important part of my freedom is my right to able to walk down the streets or sleep in my bed at night without the fear of being shot by an armed assailant.

You actually sound like a communist, presenting your way as the only right way of doing things and simply dismissing all others as wrong out of hand. You need to broaden your horizons somewhat and perhaps gather more knowledge of the multitude of different societies thriving in the world around you. A sabbatical with the intention of traveling might help you to see that there is more than one way to live your life in happiness and safety, could you actually state in no uncertain terms in what way, other owning a handgun, you have more freedom than a UK citizen? Because i can't think of any.