The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

Webleymkv · September 17, 2012, 12:14 AM

I'd very much like to see a breakdown of who perpetrated the violence in Northern Ireland and against whom it was perpetrated because the raw numbers can be misleading without context. I would not be surprised to find out that the majority of the violence stems from attacks and retaliation between opposing paramilitary groups and that most of those killed or attacked were, in one way or another, affiliated with one of those various groups. I would further be unsurprised to learn that violence against ordinary people who are not affiliated or involved with the IRA, UVF, British military, or other such group are at much lower risk and that violence against such people is relatively rare.

In the United States, however, we do not and have not been in a state of civil war for nearly 150 years so violence between organized paramilitary groups is quite uncommon (about the closest you'll come is violence between criminal gangs in large cities). However, random acts of violent crime is becoming increasingly common and thus many people who are not involved with paramilitary groups, organized crime, or other such dangerous affiliations still have a very legitimate need to own and carry a gun for self-defense.

A similar comparison would be between the United States today and the United States of the 1920's and 1930's. The violent crime rate of the 20's and 30's was fairly high due to Prohibition-era organized crime and Depression-era motorized bandits. While this period of time is often thought of as "lawless," what many people do not realize is that the violence was overwhelmingly between the criminals and police or amongst the criminals themselves. The average law-abiding citizen of 20's and 30's America actually had very little to fear in comparison to the average law-abiding citizen of today's America. So, as you can see, context makes a huge difference.

September 17, 2012, 12:14 AM	#21
Webleymkv Senior Member Join Date: July 20, 2005 Location: Indiana Posts: 10,446	I'd very much like to see a breakdown of who perpetrated the violence in Northern Ireland and against whom it was perpetrated because the raw numbers can be misleading without context. I would not be surprised to find out that the majority of the violence stems from attacks and retaliation between opposing paramilitary groups and that most of those killed or attacked were, in one way or another, affiliated with one of those various groups. I would further be unsurprised to learn that violence against ordinary people who are not affiliated or involved with the IRA, UVF, British military, or other such group are at much lower risk and that violence against such people is relatively rare. In the United States, however, we do not and have not been in a state of civil war for nearly 150 years so violence between organized paramilitary groups is quite uncommon (about the closest you'll come is violence between criminal gangs in large cities). However, random acts of violent crime is becoming increasingly common and thus many people who are not involved with paramilitary groups, organized crime, or other such dangerous affiliations still have a very legitimate need to own and carry a gun for self-defense. A similar comparison would be between the United States today and the United States of the 1920's and 1930's. The violent crime rate of the 20's and 30's was fairly high due to Prohibition-era organized crime and Depression-era motorized bandits. While this period of time is often thought of as "lawless," what many people do not realize is that the violence was overwhelmingly between the criminals and police or amongst the criminals themselves. The average law-abiding citizen of 20's and 30's America actually had very little to fear in comparison to the average law-abiding citizen of today's America. So, as you can see, context makes a huge difference.