If they swapped their guns for tools.

[mynameisdan 10]

But the leaders chose to purchase, carry and use the guns. At some point in that process they should have learned from the teachings of their peaceful religion and decided that working together could be a possible solution.

 

Arms dealers have been known to approach villages and towns to sell arms and not just the government (although they sell to the government 1st and the villages 2nd). I agree that the lesson is simply not to buy guns. I do think arms dealers have some onus of the issue though they often only need to sell 1 gun to get started, as when your neighbour buys a gun what do you do? Sit around and wait to get shot by the bloke next door for your food and supplies? Or arm up yourself with a bigger gun so he never tries.

 

Same goes for an oppressive regime, with their soldiers armed to the teeth pillaging villages and stealing aid. To feed your family what would you need a socket set or an AK47??

 

Tough issue. I agree guns are not the way.

[skinz 10]

Blame the user not the drug. Guns will always be made. You can't possibly blame arms manufacturers for how they're used. The people holding the guns to the heads of their fellow countrymen should accept responsibility surely.

 

 

I never blamed anyone. As long as people make guns people will use them for good and bad purposes, in the same way manufacturers will produce them for the same reasoning. A gun like a drug is an inanimate object and is pretty useless without man using them. To enable you to use it you have to manufacture it. If you can't get access to guns you wont have men running around with them. It isn't a case of blame it's a case of logic. That doesn't mean that people will stop overnight from destroying one another, they've been doing that well before guns came on the scene.

 

A warmongering idiot will not be persuaded by your simplistic world view in the same way an arms manufacturer wouldn't listen to mine.

[Tony Erikson 10]

Arms dealers have been known to approach villages and towns to sell arms and not just the government (although they sell to the government 1st and the villages 2nd). I agree that the lesson is simply not to buy guns. I do think arms dealers have some onus of the issue though they often only need to sell 1 gun to get started, as when your neighbour buys a gun what do you do? Sit around and wait to get shot by the bloke next door for your food and supplies? Or arm up yourself with a bigger gun so he never tries.

 

Same goes for an oppressive regime, with their soldiers armed to the teeth pillaging villages and stealing aid. To feed your family what would you need a socket set or an AK47??

 

Tough issue. I agree guns are not the way.

 

Fair enough. The arms dealers sell the weapons and I do know they can have dirty tricks. Doesn't mean the leading party should use them against their own, hold them back and when the whole place is starving ask for help. I'm not the smartest bloke in the world but I know when people are starving bullets aren't very nourishing.

 

In giving money to the starving I feel we're enabling the regime.

[Tony Erikson 10]

I never blamed anyone. As long as people make guns people will use them for good and bad purposes, in the same way manufacturers will produce them for the same reasoning. A gun like a drug is an inanimate object and is pretty useless without man using them. To enable you to use it you have to manufacture it. If you can't get access to guns you wont have men running around with them. It isn't a case of blame it's a case of logic. That doesn't mean that people will stop overnight from destroying one another, they've been doing that well before guns came on the scene.

 

A warmongering idiot will not be persuaded by your simplistic world view in the same way an arms manufacturer wouldn't listen to mine.

 

If the leaders aren't willing to help the people why should we. We're just going to fatten up a few chickens only for them to slaughter them next year.

 

I don't want the warmongers to be persuaded by my simplistic logical world view. I want them to accept responsibility for what they're doing and help their fellow citizens rather than asking for handouts when the situation is of their doing.

[mynameisdan 10]

Fair enough. The arms dealers sell the weapons and I do know they can have dirty tricks. Doesn't mean the leading party should use them against their own, hold them back and when the whole place is starving ask for help. I'm not the smartest bloke in the world but I know when people are starving bullets aren't very nourishing.

 

In giving money to the starving I feel we're enabling the regime.

 

Behind you 100%, it's truly awful how a regime responsible for the people of a country have only their own interests and prosperity at heart. Stealing aid to sell and buying guns to protect themselves from a coup (which is often how they gain power) is disgusting. Where elections are held they usually happen with only one outcome, a continuation of the same to cries of corruption. And when the day arrives and a leader is overthrown, the only thing that changes is name of the oppressor.

 

It's very sad.

[skinz 10]

If the leaders aren't willing to help the people why should we. We're just going to fatten up a few chickens only for them to slaughter them next year.

 

I don't want the warmongers to be persuaded by my simplistic logical world view. I want them to accept responsibility for what they're doing and help their fellow citizens rather than asking for handouts when the situation is of their doing.

 

Your world view to you may seem logical, how you achieve it seems not only simplistic but overly so. Anyone with half a dozen brain cells knows that downing a gun and replacing it with a shovel knows fine well the shovel becomes a weapon, considering the climate.

 

Drug addicts should stop taking drugs and pick up a tool. The world would be a better place. Is that your type of logic?

 

If you disagree with government policy then refuse to pay your tax to highlight it. If you don't wish to contribute privately then it's simple, don't.

[Tony Erikson 10]

Your world view to you may seem logical, how you achieve it seems not only simplistic but overly so. Anyone with half a dozen brain cells knows that downing a gun and replacing it with a shovel knows fine well the shovel becomes a weapon, considering the climate.

 

Drug addicts should stop taking drugs and pick up a tool. The world would be a better place. Is that your type of logic?

 

If you disagree with government policy then refuse to pay your tax to highlight it. If you don't wish to contribute privately then it's simple, don't.

 

I don't have a solution and have never professed to. When you see starving people and men the healthy men around them have guns it doesn't matter whether your view is logical, simplistic, naive or ludicrous. The wrong tool is in their hands. It's not about government policy or personal beliefs. Something is simply wrong and until they realise that guns only kill then we're just going to be throwing money at a lost cause.

 

We should let nature kill them and them all starve rather than us fatten them up only to be slaughtered by their own in a few years.

[boyfriday 21]

Providing he was democratically elected in I wouldn't have much say. Though I imagine if he did get into power there would be a lot of citizens who would wish to exchange their tools for guns and have him removed. What's your point?

 

My point is the warlords in Somalia aren't democratically elected and assuming it's unlikely Abu Hamza would ever be democratically elected I'd be one of those swapping tools for guns if he ever came into a position of power.

[Tony Erikson 10]

My point is the warlords in Somalia aren't democratically elected.

 

So why support the regime? We're enabling it by picking up the pieces. At some point the people will fight back or all die. It's not for us to decide. If they fight back, eventually no regime. If they all die, no regime.

[boyfriday 21]

The reality is that the leaders rule by fear and I know that this will upset certain people but that fear is put in place by the medieval version of Islam that controls the country.

While ever Islam controls most of Somalia things will not improve as the religious leaders fear change and modernisation will loosen their grip on the people who they would rather see starve and die than accept outside aid that may influnce the population.

 

What about the Christian gangsters in places like Uganda?

[boyfriday 21]

Let's try and stay within the realms of reality.

 

Let's try and picture the kind of circumstances where people might swap their tools for guns?

[Tony Erikson 10]

What about the Christian gangsters in places like Uganda?

 

Don't turn my thread into a Muslim bashing thread. I've seen you ruin many a thread so keep it on topic.