What's the Difference?

[jdhz28]

This thought came to me today when having lunch with a Syrian co-worker...He is currently residing in Lebanon, due to the fear of being murdered by the government, or being captured and held hostage by the rebels. It doesn't seem like a scenario that could be too far off in the future here, dependent upon how the next few months go politically.(I doubt it, but so did the Syrians 2 years ago) I wonder how it seems to be okay for the US to give weapons to the opposition, (much like we did in Afghanistan) to fight a corrupt and oppressive government...knowing all along that not all of them end up in the hands of freedom fighters. Some of those arms will go to anti-American militants that may use them against us in the future. This has happened before. If this whole gun control issue is really about making things safer, then why is it okay to arm known enemies, and disarm known law abiding citizens? This furthers my beliefs that this gun grab legislation is merely an act to cover other intentions. I have always felt that way, but lacked the ability to give it motive. I just don't understand why the people in office continue to play us as fools. Am I totally off base here?

[Jumping Frog]

Disarming has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with exerting power and control, even though they are deluding themselves about power and control.

[Andrew]

This thought came to me today when having lunch with a Syrian co-worker...He is currently residing in Lebanon, due to the fear of being murdered by the government, or being captured and held hostage by the rebels. It doesn't seem like a scenario that could be too far off in the future here, dependent upon how the next few months go politically.(I doubt it, but so did the Syrians 2 years ago) I wonder how it seems to be okay for the US to give weapons to the opposition, (much like we did in Afghanistan) to fight a corrupt and oppressive government...knowing all along that not all of them end up in the hands of freedom fighters. Some of those arms will go to anti-American militants that may use them against us in the future. This has happened before. If this whole gun control issue is really about making things safer, then why is it okay to arm known enemies, and disarm known law abiding citizens? This furthers my beliefs that this gun grab legislation is merely an act to cover other intentions. I have always felt that way, but lacked the ability to give it motive. I just don't understand why the people in office continue to play us as fools. Am I totally off base here?

While a little dated this aricle http://johnrlott.tripod.com/armediraqis.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; by John Lott has a lot to say about how turn ins/confiscation doesn't work. Iraqis faced with the prospect of U.S. combat troops taking them under fire, chose to keep their weapons.