issuevoter wrote on Oct 5
th, 2018 at 7:29pm:
Show us all, the parallel between Australia, Switzerland, and the United States, as it applies to firearms.
Switzerland is a tiny, fabulously weathy, naturally defended, and socially cohesive mountain state. It has no social pressures.
The United States, built on social pressures, challenged and surpassed Europe during the industrial revolution. Australia was a tiny sheep raising backwater with no industry or influence on world affairs. It had no social pressures and no armed and warlike native tribes.
Gun violence in Australia during the 19th century was restricted to the use of primitive, antiquated, and obscelete cast off weapons from Europe and the USA. In surpassing Europe, the USA found itself in the most violent of circumstances, while being at the forefront of weapons design and manufacture. Its criminals and even its native tribes drew upon that industry.
And from that situation they have today, a society that is steeped in gun violence, and the paranoia that a proportion of the citizens believe the Democrats might try to take their guns away.
There is no comparison between Switzerland, the United States, and Australia. We have reasonable gun laws, and the American Democrats are not demanding anything more.
As for Australia, if we loosen gun laws, like the good old days that some people yurn for, just remember that we now legally harbour people who would attack our institutions and ourselves. The idea that an armed populace will be able to counter such attacks, is completely irrational, and shows no understanding of society and history.
And who's brilliant idea was it to harbour these mongrels?
Do I have the right to defend myself against these individuals or am I supposed to let them do as they please and wish them well when they're finished?