Do you believe there could ever be a large scale Civil War in any of the G20 Nations?

Anything is possible.

That is why we (Americans) cherish our freedom and rights so much.

Very difficult to predict, could it happen, certainly… but I think a lot has to do with how the political will of the people is address/enabled in the future and if the social pervasiveness of a “that’s just the way it is” attitude continues. Those plus the perceived fairness of and availability of opportunities and resources will likely decide what comes to pass.

If the yahoos in the NRA have their way they’ll probably precipitate it.

@SeventhSense You are confusing the NRA with those “free man posse” types. The NRA is just a sportsman’s organization with a lobbying arm to defend 2nd Amendment rights.

doubt it

Yes, I think there could. What conditions would have to exist to make it impossible? Are those conditions present?

@stranger_in_a_strange_land
Yes I know…
The right to buy submachine guns because of the deer threat
or wreak havoc on a high school populace

“The right to buy submachine guns” because we can if we want to.

They are a lot of fun. :-)

The example below can be uses with most anything.

Not for these 13 kids

The NRA does not support civilians toting submachineguns atound. You can purchase one if you register it and pay the proper (very high) tax. The automatic weapons that criminals are using are already illegal, There has been virtually zero crimes committed with licensed automatic weapons since that law was passed in 1934.

Basically, the NRA advocates responsible firearms ownership and harsh penalties for those who commit crimes using firearms. What we object to is “knee-jerk” legislation that does nothing to remove firearms from the hands of criminals and penalizes or disarms law-abiding people.

A firearm is an inanimate object, no more dangerous in and of itself than a chainsaw or an automobile, We don’t ban automobiles because a drunk driver kills a group of people. We lock up the driver. A violent person will use whatever weapon, or improvised weapon is at hand. Identify those with violent tendencies and either treat them or keep them behind bars.

@stranger_in_a_strange_land
It’s an immature nation that will not curtail some of it’s indulgences for the sake of the collective good.
What we object to is “knee-jerk” legislation that does nothing to remove firearms from the hands of criminals and penalizes or disarms law-abiding people.
Of course limiting the amount of firearms in the society can not disarm criminals. They are two separate issues. Limiting the amount of firearms in the society has the sole effect of lowering the overall weapons in circulation. Criminals with weapons are best dealt with by law enforcement with weapons not civilians.

The weapons used in Columbine and countless other incidents were not illegally obtained but simply fell into the wrong hands because of neglect of those in positions of authority over these children. If we know that incidents like these are apt to occur we should choose as a nation to curtail some of our “freedoms” for the sake of the common good.
And surely a criminal or homicidal youth could choose other weapons of death but maybe there would be more deep flesh wounds and scars rather than morbidity if weapons of mass destruction were not so readily at their disposal. Case in point their homemade bombs which failed to detonate.

The bottom line is that it’s a lucrative industry and those who profit from this have a very strong lobby and keen interest in protecting their business interests, not unlike the tobacco industry.
As to the knee jerk responses, These are really found in employing cut rate dramatists to showboat.

@SeventhSense Not just business interests, personal rights enshrined in the Constitution (and recently affirmed by the Supreme Court to be personal, not state rights).

This is a hypothetical argument. The only way to disarm the US citizenry would be to repeal the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution. It would take 38 states to ratify that. It will never happen.

The only practical solution to violence is lock up the violent before they cause major harm. Gun violence occurs even in nations that have effectively forbidden the private ownership of firearms, criminals will get them if they want them. Disarming law abiding people only guarrantees that they will be a victim to any weapon-toting thug.

I agree that it is unwise for an untrained person to attempt to use a firearm in self defense. Such skills (and knowledge of when deadly force in allowable) is not rocket-science. Such skills are easily taught to any person of moderate intelligence.

In the US, we have not created a social compact that takes away individual rights of defense of self or property, unlike some other nations. The right to be armed is federally guarranteed. The degree to which you can use deadly force in defense is left to the states, but it is not strictly up to the police.

The only practical solution to violence is lock up the violent before they cause major harm.
I disagree. This is not solving anything. We build bigger and bigger prisons and incarcerate more people every year and the cycle and escalation only continues. Of course this will never be solved by legislation but the will of people to look to the roots of our violent culture.

I thought this was a question about the possibility of a civil war in a G20 country!

Here is the list: with my probability estimates over the next 20 to 40 years

Argentina, 9%
Australia, 0%
Brazil, 7%
Canada, 0%
China, 4%
France, 3%
Germany, 4%
India, 8%
Indonesia, 12%
Italy, 3%
Japan, 2%
South Korea, 6%
Mexico, 1%
Russia, 4%
Saudi Arabia, 4%
South Africa, 3%
Turkey, 2%
United Kingdom, 1%
United States, 2%
European Union, 4%

I base these estimates on government stability, racial and ethnic inequalities, inherent militancy, religious extremism, history of civil war.

@Dr_Lawrence
Maybe you can pick a good stock for me?

@SeventhSense Then we continue to build more prisons, if necessary, but if nonviolent criminals or those guilty of “victimless crimes” are not incarcerated there should be plenty of room to put the violent offenders. Yes, we live in a violent society, but taking away self defense from the innocent is not the answer.

This is a moot point, since the constitution guarrantees the right to be armed.

The “roots of violence” are people who think that they can act violently and get away with it. These people belong in cells. Teach children from the earliest possible age that if you act violently, you get put in a cell. Maybe that will begin to address the problem.

peace.

@SeventhSense Pax et bonum. :)

@Dr_Lawrence – I respectfully disagree with your list. What are your sources?

For example I’m puzzled about

Germany, 4%
Saudi Arabia, 4% (religious fanatics versus ruling princes)
South Africa, 3%
Turkey, 2% (Kurdish people are a large minority)
United Kingdom, 1% (potentially fragile peace in northern Ireland)

So South Africa is slightly more stable than Germany?

I had no sources, they were on the fly, gut feeling estimates.
Germany’s reunification has created a great storm of discontent in the West side.

Your point about Turkey is a good point.

Saudi Arabia has seemed fairly stable due to the huge oil revenues.

I could be all wrong. It was a question that called for speculation.
I speculated.

@mattbrowne
LOL- I think he was kind of being half serious/half tongue in cheek. But imagine if he was accurate- that would be quite impressive. :)

It would be quite unnerved if my predictions turned out to be accurate. I do not wish to have so accurate a view of the future (unless I can profit materially from it).

Germany’s reunification has created a great storm of discontent in the West side? Really? Most people I talked to thought it was wonderful. And this revolution was peaceful. A few were worried about the economic power. But Germany as a whole is part of the EU. So the EU is the new powerhouse, not Germany.

Besides, why does this increase the chances of a civil war within Germany? You mean Ossis shooting Wessis? Or are you referring to the Turkish people who live in Germany? Is there a history of violence between them and the Germans?

Still, speculations are a good thing. I like doing this occasionally. It’s food for thought and other people react to it which can result in interesting debates.

In case you wonder about the terms Ossis and Wessis:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ossi_(East_Germans)#Culture

@Dr_Lawrence Canada got 0% I think alberta and the french would revolt and attack ottowa any decade now