Here is some video footage of ChiCom troops gunning down ostensibly unarmed Tibetans as they crossed the Himalayas trying to escape to Nepal.  The footage is dated Sept 30, 2006 so it is only about 2 weeks old.  These are the wages of an oppressive government ruling over a disarmed populace.

 Anti-gunners often throw out the old canard that small arms are useless against tanks, missiles, jets, JDAMS, etc.  However, it is highly likely that these Tibetans wouldn't be getting gunned down if they had a rifle to shoot back with.  At least one of the victims is represented as Buddhist clergy so I should revise that to say that even the possibility of these individuals being armed and able to shoot back would make the ChiCom troops.  Oppression and murder usually start with police actions, not carpet-bombing.  An armed populace can make the governments efforts to oppress expensive enough that they and their soldiers reconsider their actions. 

Every gun control argument by every gun control advocacy group and government are all predicated upon the assumption that governments are an innocuous and even beneficial force in the lives of the people living under their jurisdiction.  Gun rights activists, conservatives, and libertarians seem to be more aware of history and/or too pragmatic to make such a fallacious (and quite honestly asinine) assumption.

It is with great relish that I see anti-gun liberals come to this realization even if it is driven by Bush derangement syndrome and crazy talk about defending themselves about the "republican army."   I just wish they would fully come to their senses and realize that any government is capable of murdering its citizens, not just the ones you hate.