Re: [FT][SG][DS] Canada, the US Civil War II, and the structure

Brian Burger wrote:

> these are non-controversial rights - but when you get Americans of a
> certain type talking about rights, they start yammering about the
right to
> own lots and lots of artillery - pardon, the "right" to bear arms, and
> want to tie this into safety, etc etc. ("Yes, I can only be safe in my
own
> home if I own a big handgun that my 3-year old will blow his brains
out
> with!")

	You mean like the "right" to defend yourself against the
individual's
two greatest enemies:  Criminals and The State... as if there is really
a difference.

> Most of the rest of the world doesn't think this way (thank god) so
our
> universal NAC rights have hit a snag...unless all the gun nuts kill
> themselves off in the 2nd ACW...This is without mixing religion into
> things.
>

	That's because the rest of the world respects freedom the same
way most
people respect dog shit.  America is, or at least it was supposed to be,
the first society that put the freedoms of the individual first.  Most
of the population of this dirty little mud-ball still believe the notion
that the government is always right, even when they are slaughtering
this week's political or ethnic scapegoat.  Europe is perhaps the best
example.  The Old World still believes that they are loyal surfs (or
"subject") to the local lord of the manor (i.e. bureaucrats, ministries,
kings, prime ministers, dictators), whom they count on them for
protection (i.e. censorship, state controlled economies, jack-booted
border guards, GUN CONTROL!!!).  Feudalism didn't die, it just got
re-named "social democracy."

-- 
Good Day....

Mark A. Siefert,
A sovereignty onto himself.

E-MAIL: cthulhu@csd.uwm.edu		WWW: http://www.uwm.edu/~cthulhu
========================================================================
=