Thank you for responding to my points rather than myself personally. Strong arguments are always based on undermining the arguer, not the argument.

(For clarity's sake, the above is sarcasm.)

Can't help myself! (<--that might be James Brown).

....I'll take that as a yes.

That David Cassidy thing again, and again....

Country class, though appealingly alliterative, is an abstraction as well. Who is in it? What links them? Etc.

Also, classifying my mindset as confused is a cheap rhetorical trick. I have in no way demonstrated confusion.

dcb,
respectfully, UK has a higher violent crime rate than the US.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...
you aren't reaching utopia over there on your island any time soon :)
this is a matter of self defense. what best allows a 100 lb female to stop a 300lb male from attacking her?

Are you confused by the "country class" as well?

....sigh... :) (I won't say it.)

Exactly, he was using a lot of conceptual integrations without mentioning the existents they refer to. He said ruling class, but it is unclear what he means. Who? How? Even "the government" is an abstraction, as it is a collection of individuals.

he did not trust the govt (ruling class) to uphold his rights. He specifically mentioned his right to own firearms. He specifically said he anticipated many would leave "say goodbye to your tax base."
Rand's definition of abstract ideas are "...conceptual integrations which subsume an incalculable number of concretes." PWNI

Yep, what she said :)

It is true that I'm British David but I fear I must refute your claim that having stringent gun controls is the hallmark of a totalitarian state when the "right to bear arms" time and time again, tragically infringes on others right to life.....that is a diametrically opposed concept to me. Lets for one moment say that you are correct in your assumptions however; but whilst gun rights provide our much coveted freedom, do they not also further & perhaps more perilously imprison us?! In what way does an American experience freedom thanks to un-infringed gun rights, than for example, a Brit would?! If history has shown us that "ALL GOVERNMENTS" eventually deteriorate into a state of totalitarianism then surely the most pertinent question is, where has the gun been to protect us from this recurring event? Or has the gun just been one of the tools provided to us by the totalitarian state to perpetuate the myth of freedom but instead only serves to further enslave us?

There was no concrete as to why though and what the battle he was fighting is. He said he was fighting for rights and against the coming progressive utopia which the ruling class was coming to based on the Hegelian Dialectic. None of those ideas are concretes.

For the sake of clarity:
I am using abstract to mean an idea that doesn't refer to a defined thing in reality.

I am using concrete to mean a defined thing in reality.

it wasn't abstract at all. that's why I like it!

jm, did you miss the part where Eudaimonia said he was taking his family and leaving the state if Conn passed any new gun laws?
I agree with your second statement

This video wasn't really pro-guns specifically. It was more an abstract statement on rights in general.

I don't really think your "version of utopia" is naive. Rather, it's misguided. First, the idea of "utopia" is unachievable. Second, you can't define a society by tools. A gun is a tool. People use tools how they want.

Thank you dk.

THAT. WAS. AWESOME.

Don't mind David dcb. He's an acquired taste. :)