Note to the moderators: While this post may be pushing the edges a tad, this isn't intended to be a political rant, just an attempt to help those outside the USA understand it a bit better and answer some questions that were asked.
It isn't just Hollywood. The US military and it's foreign adventures sustain that image. But I guess it's just the media brushing that up too? It is the image I have been seeing over and over again; US troops engaged in conflict in who knows what corner of the world.
That isn't the USA internally, that is war outside the USA. In the American perspective that is the difference between night and day.
What you are seeing is simply military adventurism outside the USA by a US Federal Government running amok which many, if not most in the USA are getting increasingly disgusted with. The constant propaganda that 'those people' want to kill us simply because we are who we are is wearing thin. By America's own principles upon which it was founded, our country is not supposed to be doing any of these things.
For financial reasons, the US government's military adventurism will probably be seriously curtailed in about 2 or 3 years when the US economy finally implodes. War, American style, is extremely expensive. The adventure in Iraq alone cost so much money that it could have bought every American family a new house and every adult who wanted one could have gotten a free master's degree from a decent university.
I had absolutely no idea! Allthough unbelievable or incomprehensible (as a Dutch ex-policeofficer myself) it does put things in a whole new perspective for me. Now I'm starting to understand why many are armed. I would be myself, no doubt.
So that's what the second amendment is all about then; selfdefense?
No, self-defense was considered to simply be a God given right as natural as breathing. That is how most Americans still view it. The true meaning of the Second Amendment in the US Constitution is about one thing. It is about the government not having a monopoly on the use of force.
Regardless of how many weapons of mass destruction a government has at it's disposal, no government can inflict absolute tyranny upon it's own people when they are armed. This is because against their own people, things like nuclear weapons are useless. So, governments who desire to control people in ways the people do not want inevitably have to resort to terror with thugs. With an armed population, governments run out of thugs very rapidly when they push too hard. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn also talked about this in his book, "The Gulag Archipelago".
As a safeguard against tyranny, firearms in the hands of the people are crucial. They are the insurance that a people can say, "No!" to their government. This is why the Founding Fathers enshrined the right to keep and bear arms in the US Constitution as the 2nd Amendment, because it guarantees the freedoms enshrined in the 1st Amendment. This isn't my interpretation, it is what the Founding Fathers of the USA said.
Here is what George Washington, the 1st US president and considered to be the 'Father of the Country', said about this:
“Government is not reason, nor eloquence. It is force. And like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearsome master.”
He also said:
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence... From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security, and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable... The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference. When firearms go, all goes."
Thomas Jefferson, the 2nd US president and the man who drafted the Declaration of Independence, said:
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
So basically it is a flawed (or maybe even made up) image the media is presenting? I have to be honest; they had me fooled. I thought the general US society was one dominated by violence (of any sort) and fear.
Question remains who would benefit of such a distorted image, but that's a completely new discussion, I guess.
The media in the USA is controlled by a very small handful of powerful people who act in unison like a cartel. Joseph Goebbels never had such power. There is a serious internal struggle going on for the control of the USA between diametrically opposed forces which may not be widely understood or even noticed by foreign observers.
Those in the USA who push foreign military adventurism are those who also want to curtail or outright destroy the Second Amendment, implement warrantless searches, suspend civil liberties, have indefinite detainment without charges, legalize torture, and a whole bunch of other things. Many of these things are being implemented right now or in the process of preparing to do so. Those who control the mainstream media in the USA are in this camp.
The strongest forces fighting for the Second Amendment are also those who want to end foreign military adventurism, chop the Federal government to a fraction of what it is, and close down every military base not on American soil, bringing all of the troops home.
This internal power struggle has gotten to the point where many Americans are rightly worried that another armed civil war in America might be a reality in the near future. That is one of the biggest reasons why the shelves at retailers across the USA have been stripped of guns and ammo lately.
