Was Pearl Harbor more than 200 years ago? Time flies? And the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon? Cuban Missile Crisis? Iran hostage crisis? War of 1812? (lasted longer than just that year and was still going 200 years ago).

Is it about protecting borders or protecting citizens? "Provide for the common defense" are the words I recall.

And every single one of those (besides 1812) was a result of having an army that was too big where it didn't belong.

Actually, 1812 was a result of that as well. The federal government attempting to monopolize force on others.

Is that the histoy you were taught in "Occupied Territory CSA"?

You're really more entertaining when you're dissing shanes and making inconsistent claims about your fraternity membership.

Is there a different history?

WTC/Pentagon inspired by terrorists who absolutely loathed America's military presence in the Middle East. Osama Bin Laden's statement regarding this is cited in the 9/11 Commission report. Cuban Missle Crisis, the result of hegemony across the world including the U.S.'s support of the White Army in the Russian Revolution. Iran hostage crisis is quite simple...there wouldn't have been a hostage crisis if we didn't have people over there...and if we hadn't overthrown the Shah, likely. War of 1812 was declared by the United States forged out of expansionism and arrogance.

Do you know how many countries hate this country? And it's not even about just defending this country. The United States is basically the worlds police. This country without weapons would be like the police raiding a crack house without guns. If we didn't have any weapons, what do you think would happen to South Korea? They would get blasted by North Korea. The world would be real fucked up if the United States was weapon free.

CTFU! This is what I was about to say.

I don't disagree with any of your points. Foreign policy decisions of the past come back to bite us on the ass. Still has nothing to do with whether or not the government has a right to ban assault rifles, require universal background checks or any other proscribed measure to curb gun violence. You can call it hypocrisy all you want. That has never made it illegal or unconstitutional.

There's a difference between reciting historical facts and applying context and critical thinking skills in order to understand those facts.

There's also a difference between apples and oranges.

We were there with the permission of the Saudis enforcing an UN resolution. Same with the sanctions against Iraq which Bin Laden also had issue with. First off, they were diplomats. Second we didn't overthrow the Shah. We are the ones who helped him gain power in the first place, but even then it was a coup d'etat. I do agree that we should have stayed out of a purely internal matter, but the Shah was one of our few allies in the Middle East. Yes American expansionism was an issue. But the bigger issue was that Britain was not respecting American sovereignty.
There was also the Barbary Coast Wars which were fought over issues of free shipping, and of course both world wars in which the United States had declared itself neutral. I'm sure I can go on and find more examples of defensive wars fought by the US.

Really?!? Another school shooting!!

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/20...ing/?mobile=wp

Self defense against those that try to harm me. In Dec of 2011 I was attacked by a family member with a knife. He stabbed me 9 times. One of those cuts was to my jugular vain (not artery) and was bleeding internally for 2 day before the doctors found it during surgery to repair the nerve on my face. As you can imagine I was in fear for my life from someone that did not have a gun but a knife. My husband has a 9 mm that was always put away. I did not have an issue with guns then; it was never my thing. After the attack mu husband's 9 mm is always with me at home. If I would have had the gun closer to me that night I'm sure that I would not have had as many injuries or my sister would not have gotten hurt.

That night completely changed my life and I am all for the right to own any kind of gun. The laws that the government is pushing are going to fail. Look at Mexico. Guns are illegal but yet they have a high rate of gun violence. Look at the war on drugs. MAJOR FAIL. Look at Prohabition. FAIL.

Private ownership of guns and the ability to possess them outside the home are unquestionably more restricted in Mexico than in the US, but guns are not illegal in Mexico.

And, of course, most of the illegal guns in Mexico come from the US.

Another example, I think, of how it's just not as simple as pointing to countries with strict gun control laws and policies or lax ones and drawing direct correlations to gun violence. There are too many other factors involved.

As I was saying earlier in the thread...

Look at England. Guns are illegal and even most cops don't carry because they don't have to. War on Drugs, the drugs are imported. Same thing with booze during prohibition. I don't support a firearm ban personally, but I don't think it is doomed to fail.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/03/justic...html?hpt=hp_t1

Really?! This is truly sad! The gun thing is really getting out of control.....and I know Im gonna get blasted for this, but it has to be asked....

Why are all of these gun crimes being covered by the media being committed by weird white males?? I mean, there are hundreds if not thousands of gun violence crimes happening all over this country, and yet the media seems to only want to focus on the more tragic ones being done by one section of the demographics?? Is that strange, or to be expected??