Mage246 said:
3. So why change the law at all?
4. Civilians with guns are a poor match for a professional military with guns, tanks, planes, training, organization, etc. yes, perhaps you could win (assuming Russia's goal was occupation and not a fast strike to compel obedience - see Georgia), but at what cost? You would lose far more than Russia could. Best defense against Russian aggression is cozying up to EU more or toadying to Russia. Not guns, which frankly have never dissuaded a modern army from invading anything.
3. When I say 'people already have guns' I don't mean it as due to law, but due to high corruption. After the collaps of USSR we had a lot of guns left, that were sold out by corrupted army men on a black market. Nobody controlls that. 'Tis nott EU nor 'Murica.
4. I didn't say Russia will send a whole army, but some groups of volunteers that chinese were sending to help North Koread in their war. To prevent that.
And, yes, professional and better armed soldiers would beat an uncontrolled mass of lightly armed people, of course. But as I said a few days back Yanukovich (and only him) had been destroying and reducing the army. The number of army men are smaller than policemen. We couldn't protect ourselfs with it. In this case Russian army (if they somehow decide to use military openly) would not only face our small army, but also a big amount of crazy ****s who even were mad enough not flee en mass under sniper fire being unarmed, but imagine them all armed... The casualties for russian army would be too big, even if they win. Putin would loose a lot in of internal support in that case (not to mention the international arena). And that's when it prevents Putin to even think of that scenario.
Again, I dunno any dictatorship countries where it is allowed for the citizens to have guns. Because guns prevent that. If we had that, we wouldn't had such an amount of corruption. Our polititians have lost any feeling of responsibilty. The major reason of Maidan was the government that acted in a way 'so I'll do this, and you can't do a thing". It wasn't for corruption that a lot of countries have. But, for example - they didn't allow us to choose a mayor! When the mayor escaped and his term run out there should be an elections, but the Parliametn didn't vote to set any. Because Party of Regions knew they will not win, so they just postponed them to an uncertain time.
At the last parliament elections in 2012 Party of Regions and Communists took about 40% of votes, and oppposition parties - 60%. And despite all that they still had a majority in the parliament. How? Because they adopted the law when there are candidates that are elected from districts. They are not in any party. On this districts PR made everything they can to make the only candidate to win. Candidates might say during elections that they are against PR and yet they join their factions when they got to Parliament. Their majority is not constitutional. They do not represent people, but they continue to test our patience. Like "What can you do about it, you worthless peasants? Deal with it!". And even then in the Parliament they adopted lwas in an unlawful way - when half of the faction is absent ('cause they are all businessmen and they do not have time to work in Parliament), but their fellow deputies simply vote for them by using their cards. In this way the adopted any ****ty law they wanted. Hell, if you only saw how do they vote! There's a guy called Chechetov, he stands up looks to the list and raises hand to show other deputies whether they should vote or not for the chosen law/parliament decision. And... "What can we do about it? Nothing, because we, simple folk, have no ways to influence them." Do not wote for them? Blah, they will operate the election results in any way they want. BUT, if we had guns...
BTW, dunno if I posted it before: