I completely agree with this. Our solution to this is that those in the next generation will have to go through the same process as their parents to become CITIZENS. They will have permanent residence in the state, but in order to bear arms, vote etc. they will have to become a citizen, which involves passing elementary tests and pledging their allegiance to the principles of the state.
So even though they aren't citizens you're going to govern them by denying the right to own guns? Again, how is this any different from the USA where I'm born into a system and then forced to bend to the will of others?
Freedom from violence (peace) does not mean the freedom to murder, rape, assault, rob, steal, bully, swindle, threaten or pirate.
Murder, rape, assault and theft are violence. Threats are coercion. It's nonsense to group them together with piracy which is neither.
By the very same token banning threats is to take away your freedom of speech. If you're not allowed to wave your gun around peacefully without harming anyone while saying "give me all your money or I will kill you!" then according to your logic YOU have been violated.
Again, threats are coercion, a form of aggression, which is what I'm against. Your argument fails.
What exactly makes you think you are justified in claiming partial ownership of my gun and my mouth and dictating what I can and cannot do with it so long as I don't PHYSICALLY hurt you?
See above.