Iranian Oppression and the Small Arms Survey 2007
One thing that has struck me as I’ve watched the passionate street protests and demonstrations by Iranians clamoring for freedom and democracy, is how woefully vulnerable and defenseless they all are. I see grown men running in fear from club, chain and truncheon-wielding security forces, while teenagers and women flee from the sound of governmental gunfire. This isn’t a standard crowd control operation in a Western democracy, where professional police forces abide by constitutional law in dispersing an unruly mob. This is naked state-sanctioned violence and oppression of unarmed and peaceful civilian populations—a crackdown by a totalitarian regime, plain and simple.
Unless a great surge of the Iranian populace tips the scales in favor of the demonstrators by sheer strength of numbers, the Iranian government will most likely crush the protests, silencing all further dissent, arresting opposition leaders, and imposing even harsher population control methods. Sadly, it is a scenario the West has seen all too often when fledgling democratic movements have attempted radical political change, peaceful or otherwise, in countries ruled by dictators. The single most decisive factor in the totalitarian regimes’ ability to crush the uprisings has been the fact that the government had ample access to guns, and the people in opposition did not.
No matter which side of the national gun control argument you fall on, statistics show that those countries where the gun ownership and/or availability rates among the populace are highest are the most democratic and free societies on Earth. One needs to look no further than the Small Arms Survey 2007, of which the countries with the highest gun availability rates (guns per 100 residents) included: Switzerland (46.0), Finland (32.0), France (32.0), Sweden (31.5), Canada (31.5), Austria (31.0), Germany (30.0), and New Zealand (26.8). None of these countries is ruled today by an authoritarian regime.
The United States of America ranks number one on this list with 90.0 guns per 100 residents. This does not mean that 90% of the population in the U.S. owns a firearm. It means that of every 100 persons in America, dispersed throughout (whether one person owns 10 guns or none) there will be found 90 guns. Naturally, we are the most free and most democratic society of them all.
However, do not misconstrue the meaning here. High gun ownership rates do not make a society free and democratic. It is the fact that the people (government) of the United States of America cherish our institutions of freedom and democracy, as laid down by our Founding Fathers, so much, that individual liberties, including the right of our citizens to individually own firearms, are so dearly protected. Why is this important?
The text of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, as passed by Congress, reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Pay special note to the section “necessary for the security of a free state” (italics mine). Our Founding Fathers knew that the security of the United States, in essence, whether we, as a country, would succeed or fail, would rest, in a great part, on our ability to defend ourselves—to defend our freedom—from enemies, both foreign and domestic—which included any potential shift in the style of our own government. This could only be possible if our people had the liberty of individual gun ownership.
Totalitarian regimes crack down on unarmed populations. Armed populations can wage war against totalitarian regimes. That is why authoritarian regimes like Hitler’s Nazi Germany, the former Soviet Union, China, Iran, and many others like them prohibit or strongly curtail individual gun ownership. It is easier to stamp out individual freedom and oppress people if they can’t shoot back at you.
Naturally, what gun-control advocates blast as our “gun culture” has come at a price. The U.S. has some of the highest civilian gun-related homicide, suicide, and crime rates in the West. Of course there are many intangibles involved in controversial findings which compare anything from one country to the next. These factors include cultural differences, unequal immigration rates, the immense size and diversity of our population, and the fact that we have unique urban centers which have no equal in the world. Others would say, “Well, that’s a small price to pay for freedom.”
Because the flip side is that our police and military forces are among the most professional and respected in the world, especially by our own law-abiding Americans. We believe in the rule of law and the Constitution of the United States. Our government is not oppressing our women, imprisoning political dissenters, arresting peaceful protesters, silencing free speech, and the like.
Iran, by the way, according to the Small Arms Survey 2007 has 5.3 guns for every 100 residents. I think I saw more than 5.3 security forces cracking down on the poor Iranian people.
One thing that has struck me as I’ve watched the passionate street protests and demonstrations by Iranians clamoring for freedom and democracy, is how woefully vulnerable and defenseless they all are. I see grown men running in fear from club, chain and truncheon-wielding security forces, while teenagers and women flee from the sound of governmental gunfire. This isn’t a standard crowd control operation in a Western democracy, where professional police forces abide by constitutional law in dispersing an unruly mob. This is naked state-sanctioned violence and oppression of unarmed and peaceful civilian populations—a crackdown by a totalitarian regime, plain and simple.
Unless a great surge of the Iranian populace tips the scales in favor of the demonstrators by sheer strength of numbers, the Iranian government will most likely crush the protests, silencing all further dissent, arresting opposition leaders, and imposing even harsher population control methods. Sadly, it is a scenario the West has seen all too often when fledgling democratic movements have attempted radical political change, peaceful or otherwise, in countries ruled by dictators. The single most decisive factor in the totalitarian regimes’ ability to crush the uprisings has been the fact that the government had ample access to guns, and the people in opposition did not.
No matter which side of the national gun control argument you fall on, statistics show that those countries where the gun ownership and/or availability rates among the populace are highest are the most democratic and free societies on Earth. One needs to look no further than the Small Arms Survey 2007, of which the countries with the highest gun availability rates (guns per 100 residents) included: Switzerland (46.0), Finland (32.0), France (32.0), Sweden (31.5), Canada (31.5), Austria (31.0), Germany (30.0), and New Zealand (26.8). None of these countries is ruled today by an authoritarian regime.
The United States of America ranks number one on this list with 90.0 guns per 100 residents. This does not mean that 90% of the population in the U.S. owns a firearm. It means that of every 100 persons in America, dispersed throughout (whether one person owns 10 guns or none) there will be found 90 guns. Naturally, we are the most free and most democratic society of them all.
However, do not misconstrue the meaning here. High gun ownership rates do not make a society free and democratic. It is the fact that the people (government) of the United States of America cherish our institutions of freedom and democracy, as laid down by our Founding Fathers, so much, that individual liberties, including the right of our citizens to individually own firearms, are so dearly protected. Why is this important?
The text of the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, as passed by Congress, reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Pay special note to the section “necessary for the security of a free state” (italics mine). Our Founding Fathers knew that the security of the United States, in essence, whether we, as a country, would succeed or fail, would rest, in a great part, on our ability to defend ourselves—to defend our freedom—from enemies, both foreign and domestic—which included any potential shift in the style of our own government. This could only be possible if our people had the liberty of individual gun ownership.
Totalitarian regimes crack down on unarmed populations. Armed populations can wage war against totalitarian regimes. That is why authoritarian regimes like Hitler’s Nazi Germany, the former Soviet Union, China, Iran, and many others like them prohibit or strongly curtail individual gun ownership. It is easier to stamp out individual freedom and oppress people if they can’t shoot back at you.
Naturally, what gun-control advocates blast as our “gun culture” has come at a price. The U.S. has some of the highest civilian gun-related homicide, suicide, and crime rates in the West. Of course there are many intangibles involved in controversial findings which compare anything from one country to the next. These factors include cultural differences, unequal immigration rates, the immense size and diversity of our population, and the fact that we have unique urban centers which have no equal in the world. Others would say, “Well, that’s a small price to pay for freedom.”
Because the flip side is that our police and military forces are among the most professional and respected in the world, especially by our own law-abiding Americans. We believe in the rule of law and the Constitution of the United States. Our government is not oppressing our women, imprisoning political dissenters, arresting peaceful protesters, silencing free speech, and the like.
Iran, by the way, according to the Small Arms Survey 2007 has 5.3 guns for every 100 residents. I think I saw more than 5.3 security forces cracking down on the poor Iranian people.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home