The US Military is not allowed to act as a military against its own people. And, when the time comes, the people in those tanks and helicopters are Americans as well, they are not going to blindly follow orders and turn them against their friends and neighbors.
You mean like in New Orleans in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina, or in LA during the riots in the aftermath of the Rodney King trial? I think you have a rather misinformed opinion on whether or not a gunner in an Abrams tank is going to pull the trigger on a gun waving maniac or not. The choice between getting shot and pulling the trigger, is no choice at all. Funny thing is crimes with firearms are not as "rampant" as non-americans seem to think.
Really? That's an interesting perspective, considering that you're more than an order of magnitude more likely to be murdered by a person wielding a gun in the USA, than if you were a Coalition Soldier in Iraq. Think about it for a while. It's safer for you as an individual, to be part of an occupying military force in a war zone, than it is to live in the US. It's the only reason the US is not yet completely clamped down - precisely because they have the right to bear arms.
Yes obviously. Because that worked so well in Bosnia and Iraq. Like I said, the pathetic firearms you're allowed to keep, don't scare the people who can call in Delta Force on your "domestic terrorist threat". lol, don't have many crimes comitted with firearms in my city of about 500,000.
Probably not. What do you want to bet that more people die every year from gun homicide in your city of 500.000, compared to say the 300.000 US troops in Iraq? Thread is getting too political folks.
Well that's obviously because this is a political issue. The technology for absolute surveillance doesn't exist. It must be so disheartening for all the powermongers of the world, to see their dreams of global domination shot down by technological advancements. Maybe that's what's spurring the recent bouts of anti-intellectualism? We need to stop technological progress, because technology shall set you free! We wouldn't want that to happen, would we? You should be more concerened with behind-the-scenes data-collection.
Why? What are you going to do about it? Seriously? In London (which has the highest crime rate in Europe) there is one camera for every 6 citizens. Never the less politicians keep insisting that more surveillance makes you safer, and you keep voting for them (not you personally, I hope, you in general). All this despite at least one documented case were overzealous police officers murdered an innocent man, because he *looked* like a terrorist? I mean really? Innocent until proven guilty? Ring any bells?