RiverDog wrote:They already have enough tools to tyrannize the population, have had for a hundred years or more. No matter what happens to the 2nd Amendment, we're toast if we ever allow ourselves to be taken over by a tyrannical government (some would argue that we already have). I don't accept that reasoning as a justification for maintaining the 2nd. I'm more likely to be persuaded by a "Red Dawn" scenario than I am combatting the federal government. Our best defense against a tyrannical government is to fight it from within.
But I do agree with you regarding removing all knowledge of weaponry when you remove guns, and that IMO would be part of a justification for keeping the 2nd intact. In WW2, one advantage we had over the Germans and Japanese is that most of our boys were already familiar with weapons. As in every situation, knowledge is power.
How do you fight it from within if you are not armed? A disarmed people is without real power. All power from government comes from force. You literally do not have a government of the people if they have no capacity to use force if it becomes necessary. They have not had it for a 100 years. The weapons they possessed that long ago were easily defeated by well-trained civilians. They have had the means for extreme tyranny for about 30 to 40 years now and this generation of Americans is already dumb enough to be giving up their rights in the face of arms that will destroy them. Either people believe that there will never again be a tyrant in control of America or the world or they are thinking only of the safety for their generation without thinking of the best way to teach future people.
People like to make fun of Skynet. I'm not worried about Skynet. I'm more worried about human beings in control of a robotic warforce used against a population disarmed not only physically, but mentally as well. There is a certain attitude when you know how to use a weapon and are taught the tools of war that will be removed from the general population. These mass shootings are already a major example of the sheep-like nature of human beings accepting being nothing more than a herd for someone to kill. These same humans are looking to others for their defense rather than themselves. They are asking the government to employ the police and military class in our society to disarm the 99.99999999% of responsible gun owning Americans due to the fear caused by a minuscule number of mass shooters.
You wonder why the whack jobs think these are false flag operations, but it's the results they are seeing as to why they think that way. If a group of people wanted to disarm the American population and could do so by having a small number of mass shooters cause such a panic that a large enough percentage of Americans are willing to give up their right to bear arms primarily included in The Bill of Rights to balance military/police power between the civilian population and the government, then mission success. There are a large and growing number of people willing to remove the right to bear arms as a balance against oppressive military power from the 99.999999% of responsible gun owning Americans.
We have 1000s to tens of thousands of AR15 and assault-style weapons in this nation, yet we have a handful abused by certain individuals and we're supposed to give up all gun rights and start this lie about the 2nd Amendment not being a check and balance on government power? Really? Next I'll hear Freedom of Speech was just intended for telling jokes and insulting your neighbor.
There are very real reasons why the civilian population should be able to own military-style weapons. At the very least the weapons of the standard infantryman other than hunting or just because they feel like it. If the government ever becomes tyrannical again, the people will expected to take them down. You cannot do that if you are disarmed. I keep hearing but what about Martin Luther King and Ghandi? I say to that what about the Khmer Rouge and Communist China and Russia and Saddam Hussein and Hitler and the deaths squads in El Salvador and Cuba and the endless list of tyrants where peaceful protest and resistance did not work because the tyrants were willing to violently suppress the population even if they had to murder a bunch of them and their families.
The reality is that we are a people that should always be taught to use our vote and all possible bureaucratic avenues for resistance first, but if they should fail we have been given the right to bear arms to maintain a strong militia mindset if it should be necessary to violently oppose a tyrant inside or outside this nation. I can't believe you
Riverdog are agreeable to the idea of removing military-style weapons from the civilian population due to a minuscule number of irresponsible, irrational, and evil killers. No matter how you paint this is less than one one-millionth of the population forcing a change for millions of responsible gun owners that responsible exercise their second amendment right.