Egypt chaos sending a 2A message?

[HarrySchell]

The citizens in Egypt are using "arms" as they have them for self-defense. This is the lesson, that citizens should have access to arms for self-defense. Firearms are the most effective means currently to enable the individual right of self-defense, but other stuff works.

To have to resort to sticks and knives means generally that the physically strong can defend themselve while the physically weak are more at risk. Firearms address this, so that a 75-year old man can persuade a group of younger men to leave him alone.

The old and weak have no less of a right to self-defense than anyone, and depriving them of the means, while empowering the strong, is what the Founders thought of as part of the rationale for 2A. The use of the word "arms" is not accidental, becasue the right is an eternal one.

2A is about a right and concept more than about whether you have a musket or 1911. It happens now that a 1911 may be more effective, but when the 1911 is obsoleted, if ever, whatever replaces it will be an "arm" as contemplated under 2A.

 

[madmag]

Ok, I understand this thread will run it's natural course, but I hate to see it's demise due to discussing Islam politics.

This was meant to be a discussion about the effects of not having private gun ownership.....2A rights.

 

[BlueTrain]

Very conservative groups come to power in this country and it doesn't seem to be any different.

However, regarding self defense when there is some degree of anarchy resulting from, mostly, no police protection, citizens will naturally band together as best as they can to protect themselves. That's a stronger message than anything about firearms, if you ask me. Even in this country, when there is no anarchy, citizens sometimes band together just to keep people from driving through their neighborhood, by attempting to have access blocked through legal means. It sort of throws the idea of a public road upside down. But that's another issue.

There was a time when there was little police protection in cities and there have been large and crowded cities for a long time in this country. For those who went out at night, some did carry firearms for protection, although I've never seen much published on the subject. But small and concealable firearms have always been available and presumably sold well (there having been such a variety), so that must say something.

 

[alloy]

Seems to be less than 1% protesting of the 80 million citizens. He said he will step down. Would anyone really have wanted guns brought into the situation? I don't think that small a small % here could have done the same. I don't know that a 2a lesson was to be learned, but it hasn't totally played out yet. Seems the conduct of the military, is the lesson, hope it turns out ok.

 

[BlueTrain]

Lots of groups come to town here (D.C.), wanting to get things changed. Usually they are peaceful but sometimes things got ugly. Anyone remember the bonus marchers, who were all WWI veterans. MacArthur sent tanks after them. And there's always a lot of controversy about how many actually showed up.

 

[madmag]

I don't know that a 2a lesson was to be learned

The lesson I talked about had nothing to do with the demonstrators, but rather with the people defending their homes.

Would anyone really have wanted guns brought into the situation?

Already are, they are just in the hands of the military and police.

 

[alloy]

Well, that happens here too.
There's a demonstration, and one side has alot of guns. Folks get beat back. Rocks get thrown.
We could all shoot back in our armed society, unlike in Egypt so far, but will the outcome be positive?
Sure I like a firearm to protect what's mine, my house etc, but 1/2 mill in the streets with guns and the news would look alot different than it does today.

 

[madmag]

Sure I like a firearm to protect what's mine, my house etc, but 1/2 mill in the streets with guns and the news would look alot different than it does today.

Freedom and democracy are dangerous endeavors....just the way it is.

 

[Tom Servo]

citizens will naturally band together as best as they can to protect themselves. That's a stronger message than anything about firearms

It certainly is. I'd rather have a bunch of guys with rocks and clubs with some solidarity watching my back than a bunch of guys with guns who couldn't agree what to have for lunch.

I fear that that's where we are. We can't even be troubled to show up and vote in our elections. The Egyptians took a chance for their liberty. For all the sloganeering I hear, would we be willing to do the same? I fear that most of us wouldn't.

Would anyone really have wanted guns brought into the situation?

Already are, they are just in the hands of the military and police.

True, but the military and police aren't using them against the citizenry. There's a sense of "we're all in this together" on the ground, regardless of what CNN or whoever may be reporting.

There are military patrols and tanks on every corner, but people caught out past curfew simply get an arched eyebrow and an admonition to get home as quickly as they can.

 

[madmag]

True, but the military and police aren't using them against the citizenry. There's a sense of "we're all in this together" on the ground

Looks like that just changed. "we're all in this together" has changed to violence.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110202/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_egypt

Thousands of supporters and opponents of President Hosni Mubarak battled in Cairo's main square Wednesday, raining stones and bottles down on each other as gunshots rang in the air. In scenes of uncontrolled violence, government backers galloped in on horses and camels, only to be dragged to the ground by their rivals and beaten bloody.

I am a suspicious person. I bet a lot of the so called Mubarak supporters are soldiers and police in civilian clothes...just my guess.

Added: Just heard on cable news that there is a strong suspicion that the armed pro-Mubarak supporters are actually paid military....I continue to believe there is an underlying 2A message.

 

[zukiphile]

The Communists were removed nonviolently in the end, from Russia and Hungary.

As a fellow of some russian ancestry, I can only caution against drawing too many easy lessons from the way these people behave. I worked with a monarchist group who were generally supportive of the liberalisation under Yeltsin, a communist.

The communists were not removed from russian government. The governing principle of communism, that the party retain a monopoly on political power, suffered from only a moment of doubt before Putin re-established it to the glee of most russians.

These communists don't sing from a marxist hymnal in public any longer, but that is not a consequantial difference.


As to the egyptian circumstance and an armed populace, I note an important difference. We have a professional armed service with a strict government command ethic. In many places, the army is a political force that moderates the swings of electoral politics and generally reflects, more or less, popular sentiment. In this sense, egyptians are armed against their government with their army.

 

[BlueTrain]

I generally agree with the previous post from zukiphile. One of the flashpoints of the Russian revolution was soldiers firing on a crowd, which curiously enough, was one of the flashpoints of the American revolution. However, I'm not sure the simple possession of personal firearms even enters into the matter, at least not in a positive way. It does, if it is a question of protecting your own home but I've already talked about that. There's more to it than that.

The presence of a militia, more or less organized, may sometimes make as much difference as an army, although generalizations can confuse the issue. In the case of Egypt, there probably is nothing equivalent to a militia and the Egyptian population is not widely spread out geographically. Both factors are important. Revolutions do not happen in the wilderness; they start in cities, whether or not they are successful. But it doesn't follow which side a militia might be on either. But it is also important here to distinguish true militias from what are essentially private armies under a war lord. Those militias usually have no nationalist interests, only those of the war lord.

 

[madmag]

In this sense, Egyptians are armed against their government with their army.

Do not agree. I think the pro-Mubarak supporters are in fact military/police in civilian clothing, and they are armed against the people...not the government.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110202/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_egypt

The protesters accused Mubarak's regime of unleashing a force of paid thugs and plainclothes police to crush their unprecedented, 9-day-old movement demanding his ouster, a day after the 82-year-old president refused to step down. They showed off police ID badges they said were wrested from their attackers. Some government workers said their employers ordered them into the streets.

My personal guess is that the paid pro-Mubarak supporters will cause enough chaos that the Army will then say it has to act to clear out all demonstrators. Of course the army stood by while the pro-Mubarak forces came in....it's just a game.....my opinion of course.

 

[zukiphile]

I think the pro-Mubarak supporters are in fact military/police in civilian clothing

I would not conflate the army and police.

Part of the egyptian gripe is that the police function as a political arm of the regime. Today, I read a report that the army has moved to keep protestors and police separated.

 

[Evan Thomas]

This just in...

It seems that it is possible, at least sometimes, to have a revolution without a Second Amendment or an armed populace. President Mubarak has stepped down. Here's a link to the New York Times coverage.

A peaceful revolution so far, pretty much... who'd have thunk it? One hopes the Army, which is now running things, will do the right thing and quickly institute democratic reforms, including free elections.

 

[Al Norris]

Does everyone realize this whole shebang started with social networking on FaceBook?

 

[Tom Servo]

Does everyone realize this whole shebang started with social networking on FaceBook?

Yep. It proved two (seemingly) contradictory things:

1. The internet is a powerful medium for political change, and
2. cutting it off won't stop what's begun.

There is a tenuous 2nd Amendment link here. In the early 1990's, there was a debate on whether or not civilians should be allowed to use sophisticated encryption or whether it should be restricted to governments. The debate had very similar contours to the ones we have today regarding the 2nd Amendment and protection from government tyranny.

Information can be a weapon as dangerous as any ordnance.

Part of the egyptian gripe is that the police function as a political arm of the regime. Today, I read a report that the army has moved to keep protestors and police separated.

There's a great deal of anxiety about the idea of the military being in charge right now. I can certainly understand that, especially considering how historical trends don't bode well for that kind of situation.

Egypt is a different situation, however. Over there, you don't get to be a cop unless you've got some connections, and once you do, you're pretty much the elite. Soldiers come from the lower and middle classes, and are much more in touch with the populace.

Word from the front is that the army is likely to be the one thing guaranteeing a smooth transition to multi-party elections.

 

[Evan Thomas]

Egypt is a different situation, however. Over there, you don't get to be a cop unless you've got some connections, and once you do, you're pretty much the elite. Soldiers come from the lower and middle classes, and are much more in touch with the populace.

Word from the front is that the army is likely to be the one thing guaranteeing a smooth transition to multi-party elections.

Yes... and it's also worth noting that the older, pro-Mubarak members of the officer corps were largely trained by the Soviet Union, while the junior officers (the ones directly commanding those lower and middle class rank-and-file troops) have been trained by, and are apparently much more sympathetic to, the United States.

It will be... interesting... to see how this plays out.

Information can be a weapon as dangerous as any ordnance.

Definitely. Isn't there some cliché to that effect involving pens and swords?

 

[Tom Servo]

Definitely. Isn't there some cliché to that effect involving pens and swords?

Yep. Apparently a pen in the hand is worth two in the bush

I got a few pictures from last night's celebrations. They convey a mood of optimism and triumph, but may be off topic. One bears showing, however:

It doesn't read "wedgies for yankee pigdog." It reads "thanks, Facebook."

 

[BlueTrain]

The Iranian revolution happened pretty much the same way without the help of Facebook or the Internet. The basic technique is to get the person who has been running things out of the country.