I’m troubled by this as more and more persons in various sites seem to agree that Liberty is imperiled in America; but how could it be that so much could have been subverted or undermined without major protesting from the people? I mean, ok maybe there’s a lot of people who don’t give a damn about anything anymore, but surely there are others who care enough as to point it out – and here I mean, people in authority,educators, certain politicians and maybe priests, law enforcers or in the Armed Forces. Surely it can’t be as deep and pervading that they would be afraid to speak out, right? Or are the conspiracy theorists right and there is a major problem that could even threaten democracy? If the wrong-doers and the corrupt are relatively few, then all it takes is some bold people to put pressure and the public opinion behind them, and they get exposed. However, if the majority of all the political power in a country is corrupted and there’s only a minority that protests, then it’s a huge problem to resolve without major upheavals with potentially dramatic effects. I have seen this case here in Greece. The vast majority of the politicians are corrupt and they seem to have in their pocket the unions, barristers and judges, some high ranking officials in the police and in the army, and so on. Who’s going to expose them? Their fellows are equally corrupt and they run risk of being exposed themselves in retaliation. These guys even pay groups of trouble-makers to stir trouble in otherwise peaceful protests… this has been done by all parties in Greece for over 30 years. As for the few that protest against such a mess, they get ignored; if they cause trouble, they get slandered or smeared, and if they push it too far, their careers are ruined and their reputation goes down the drain. And in some cases, worse things happen to them.
It seems to me that their target is to make the general public more vulnerable and easy to control through fear and lack of arms or survival training. I believe I read somewhere that survivalists could be labelled as extremists! In Greece, some people already view them as such. The media make big issue everything to do with creating greater impression through fear, and of course, the laws in Greece about weapons are extremely stringent and it would be difficult to get firearms and being able to use them for self-defence without breaking the law or else in extremely few cases would it be allowed. Some of the laws don’t even make sense to many people: a burglar bearing a crowbar or something similar entered a house but the owner who was sleeping there managed to scare him off; the burglar didn’t leave but suffered a heart attack while trespassing due to the stress (!) and later proceeded in suing the owner (!!!). The burglar wasn’t sent to prison either… Not only guns are almost a no-no in self defence, but tazers are not allowed; not even pepper sprays! I suppose if someone was trained enough to be able to use everyday tools to defend himself and was calm enough to do so during an attack, perhaps he could get a chance to escape BUT if he escaped unscathed while injuring the attacker, he would still be in trouble for doing so and would have to be taken into custody (if he was outdoors during the attack, he would be questioned as to why he was carrying such tools / items that he used to defend himself with). Aside from dealing with criminals, the average person would be completely helpless if the state turned totalitarian and a dictatorship was established. So I believe that countries like the United States that still have the freedom to have at least some legal ways to defend with guns should do the utmost in their power to preserve those rights, as stated in the Constitution. These rights are there for a reason; perhaps the Founding Fathers foresaw trouble in the future and wanted to safeguard the people against a dictatorial regime. But in any case, time to end this long post with a quote:
“I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery” Thomas Jefferson, January 30, 1787