Democide: How many people will government kill this year?

Originally posted by TrueBrit
reply to post by MrHonest

 

Again, there has been no genocide, or democide here since the 1997 acts of legislature that amount to a disarming, here in the UK.

Since that is the point at which the British public could be considered to have been disarmed, only figures since that time are relevant to this subject, and there has been no such mass murder, by government of its people. Care to comment on that?

Yes, I do. Come on, man! Only 15 years had passed. What is this in the scale of existence you nation that is measured to be close to 1,000 years? This is also what above poster had said (crankySamurai).

Your royals are just waiting for the best moment to wipe you out; maybe they want to do it at the same time as US? Combining their efforts? How about the whole world? Hey! They have these United Nations and NATO, and everything is “global” now! What about global extermination? Why not??? Sounds funny but this is exactly what the “NWO” people are talking about all the time – how they want to depopulate the planet, get rid of “useless eaters”, how our poor little planet can’t sustain so many of us (but it can surely sustain the royals and money-bags…).

The fact that you, British are now disarmed makes you “sit on the bomb, waiting to be exploded”. How can ANYONE be so sure that any government will not turn against people??? That’s why guns are there to be reserved as a last resort.

Please, explain to me WHAT or WHO will stop a government of extermination their own people once they are set to do it. Exactly who and how will do it – I’m ready to listen. Don’t forget, governments are armed to teeth with super-high tech weapons.


It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets ----Voltaire

Originally posted by randomname
reply to post by MrHonest

 

i missed the canadian genocide, or the u.k. one.

evil people commit genocide, not countries or states.

the best prevention of genocide is not to allow evil people into power.

i guess the threat of an armed populace would make people think twice, but then again a populace turned to evil that is already armed is a plus.

the point is you don't need guns to prevent evil people into power. all you have to do is not let the evil take over. not to the listen to the people that do.

edit on 4-1-2013 by randomname because: (no reason given)

Battle of Athens, Tennessee, 1946

While not about genocide, it is about removal of people form power, when all other recourse has failed.

I've seen here on ATS many threads about gun control here in the US and many posters (both outside of the US and in it) that have stated that there really isn't a need for the 2nd amendment at all in modern times.

I beg to differ. 1946 was the 20th century and is "modern times", and in Athens, Tennessee, citizens of that town used their 2nd amendment right to remove a corrupt government when all other peaceful recourse had failed them:

The Battle of Athens (sometimes called the McMinn County War) was a rebellion led by citizens in Athens and Etowah, Tennessee, United States, against the local government in August 1946. The citizens, including some World War II veterans, accused the local officials of political corruption and voter intimidation. The event is sometimes cited by firearms ownership advocates as an example of the value of the Second Amendment in combating tyranny.

Citizens of McMinn County had long been concerned about political corruption and possible election fraud.[1] The U.S. Department of Justice had investigated allegations of electoral fraud in 1940, 1942, and 1944, but had not taken action.

Polls for the county election opened August 1, 1946. About 200 armed deputies turned out to patrol the precincts—the normal complement of 15 deputies significantly augmented by reinforcements from other counties. A number of conflicts arose before the polls closed, the most serious of which was when deputy CM Wise shot and wounded a black man who was trying to vote.[3] As the polls closed, deputies seized ballot boxes and took them to the jail. Opposition veterans responded by arming themselves and marching there. Some of them had raided the National Guard Armory, obtaining arms and ammunition.[5] Estimates of the number of veterans besieging the jail vary from several hundred[5] to as high as 2,000.[3] When the men reached the jail, it was barricaded and manned by 55 deputies. The veterans demanded the ballot boxes but were refused. They then opened fire on the jail, initiating a battle that lasted several hours by some accounts,[3][5] considerably less by others.[6] In the end, the door of the jail was dynamited and breached. The barricaded deputies—some with injuries—surrendered, and the ballot boxes were recovered. During the fight at the jail, rioting had broken out in Athens, mainly targeting police cars.[3][5] This continued even after the ballot boxes were recovered, but subsided by morning

The aftermath:

The recovered ballots certified the election of the five GI Non-Partisan League candidates.[6] Among the reforms instituted was a change in the method of payment and a $5,000 salary cap for officials. In the initial momentum of victory, gambling houses in collusion with the Cantrell regime were raided and their operations demolished. Deputies of the prior administration resigned and were replaced.

Not one person that helped storm that jail was arrested or convicted of any wrong doing. They even made a movie of this event back in 1992.

So while many on here post: just don't let bad people get to power, the problem can be that the people may not seem bad when climbing to power, or only to reveal themselves later on.

But this does show that here in the US, that amendment that was crafted with exactly what happened in Athens in 1946 in mind: a corrupt government that ruled with tyranny was taken down, even after nothing was being done by the Justice Department, by the very citizens of that county.....and they were able to do it because they were armed.

Period.

Something may have been done eventually down the road...after how many years? Especially since they'd been waiting for over 4 years with nothing being done.

I'm curious, if Government is the leading cause of unnatural death, why do we as a society cling to it? It's obviously a failed aspect of society that does nothing but put the most corrupt criminals in power. Isn't it time we start looking for alternate solutions?

reply to post by eriktheawful

eriktheawful
Absolutely amazing post! Thank you!!!

To Vidpci,
Government is needed in any group if people. But it must be formed and maintained by people.

It’s just people have not only rights, but RESPONSIBILITIES. In our times people seem forgotten about that. Every single person is responsible for EVERYTHING that happens in his country and the world and I don’t care how crazy this may sound. Just think about it. People should take full responsibility for who gets into power, should watch that person very closely, and remove him from power before even first suspension rises that he is not clean. This is exactly how our constitution was formed. And this is exactly why the Second Amendment is there.

We, the people, let them “sedate” us so we became careless and irresponsible. We’re now suffering for that. And to be honest, we are just an inch close to total disaster. If they disarm us, this is end. Time to take responsibility and undo what we have done while there’s still time – that is to replace whole government altogether, punish traitors according to proper due process and restore constitution. And all that is PEOPLES job. And giving out our guns is nowhere on this list.

Originally posted by Vidpci
I'm curious, if Government is the leading cause of unnatural death, why do we as a society cling to it? It's obviously a failed aspect of society that does nothing but put the most corrupt criminals in power. Isn't it time we start looking for alternate solutions?

Because normally, large groups of people want to have the rule of law.

Anarchy rarely works for anything above a small group of people. When you have large populations, you need law enforcement and other public services. Most of those are provided by a government.

The other reason for a government is to have representation for your country that you live in on a international level.

The US formed it's government over 200 years ago with the idea that those who would govern us would be those that we pick or decide on. That the offices that they hold are public servant offices. They serve the people, and not the other way around.

Not a bad idea, and I believe it worked quite well for a long time here in our country. But then the older our country got, expanding it borders, cities growing and of course the population itself getting bigger, allowed for the government to get bigger.

Leading us up to today in which your average citizen of the US if you pulled them off the street and asked them, they would tell you that the government tells them what to do, and that the population should serve the government.

That is of course a complete 180 from what our founding fathers wanted, but that is basically how the government works now.

I think our government could use a big reform. A PEACEFUL reform.

However, if you look at the amount of money that leaders make as a salary and the benefits that they get both during their time in office and especially afterwards, I don't know if we'll ever be able to do that.

I firmly believe that if our country's leaders had their salaries stripped down and capped, and multitude of the benefits that they get removed, and then give them the same retirement plan as say our military (it's really stupid.....a enlisted veteran of our military gets paid a very small sum of money compared to our leaders, and actually put their lives in harms way, and if they make it to 20 years, get half that pay that they were making when they retire......where as our politicians make an OBSCENE amount of money, even when they leave office).

In other words: remove the power. Remove the attraction of all that money. Make them what they are suppose to be:

A Public Servant.

reply to post by MrHonest


I am aware of what COULD happen. What I am speaking of, is what HAS happened. We are a nation disarmed, and we have had NO mass murders by the government since that disarming occured.

reply to post by TrueBrit


Not directly maybe. How many of your soldiers have been sent to some nonsense war and died? If those numbers are counted, which I think they should be, it paints a different story. Not only for you guys across the ocean either, for all of the western world prettymuch.

reply to post by TKDRL


Need I point out that aside from the police and private paramilitary organisations (like bodyguards, and so on) the boys and girls who go off to fight wars that no one wants fought, are the only British people who actually lug weapons about?

As fallacy goes, this is pretty huge!

The people you are talking about, made a choice. Murder victims rarely have such a choice. Though I hate the way the recent military actions undertaken by my nation have panned out, the basis on which they were undertaken in the first place, and the people who doctored the dossiers that sent them on that mad quest, I do respect the men and women on the front lines. I respect them enough that I know they chose thier fate. This is yet another thing that murder victims rarely get to do. These people do not count to the figure.

You show me a pile of citizens of the UK, civillians dead in the street in great drifts, like a snow of decay, then I might agree with you, but there are no such piles of the dead, dying, and damned. Just the usual McDonalds wrappers, coke bottles, and discarded cigarette butts.

reply to post by MrHonest


No , wrong. CIGARETTES! have killed more people than anything really have. 400,000 smoking related deaths in the US yearly. Course the tobackee companies had the help of the government from the start, but still. WOOWSEE!

Originally posted by TrueBrit
reply to post by MrHonest

 

I am aware of what COULD happen. What I am speaking of, is what HAS happened. We are a nation disarmed, and we have had NO mass murders by the government since that disarming occured.

Citizens of a nation disarmed is not a guarantee of being subject to genocide, but a high chance. What is a guarantee of NO genocide, is if people have guns. No genocide happened in Britain recently – that’s not a guarantee that it will not happen. The guarantee would be if you, British, had guns. In MOST countries genocide or democide followed disarmament of citizens.

Do we want to play with fire or just keep our guns as a warranty against genocide?