First of all, “one party” simply asked for regulation instead of bending over for the NRA without it even reaching around to return the courtesy.
Second, there is a reason why lone gunmen shoot up schools and not military bases.
What are you gonna do when the government comes after you with your scrawny ass weapon? It’ll work against a neighbor, sure, but the military can see through your walls using wifi alone. There’s a literal helicopter above your house tracking your every move. They know more about you than you realize. This is the strongest army in the world we’re talking about.
And, even if violence sounds tempting, there are so many things to do before any of that, like resist and organize. You can definitely fight back in man other ways besides a picket sign and a gun. I’m not sure why those are the only two options.
No way that would work here. We have like, grass and stuff. The sand helps to… slow them down or something…
It’s not that funny but I’m poking at the anti 2A people who always ask what you plan to do with your rifle against an apache helicopter. There’s good examples to point to as you noted, but I’m more interested in the obvious counter point, which is what are you going to do to that apache without a gun? I never hear an answer to that one. Obviously nobody on the ground is going to be having a good time in that situation but at the end of the day I’d rather be taking shots at it than throwing rocks or just lying face down and hoping they miss me.
Is he mowing people down? He’s purging and people are resisting, as they should. And despite that the only threat has been towards us foreigners. You have more to worry about your fellow bleeding heart patriots. Arm yourselves against those first if you must.
The point of the second amendment isn’t to go toe-to-toe with the military and never has been. It’s to make every citizen a potential threat to those in power, and to allow for guerilla warfare.
A pistol can’t beat a tank, but it can kill a politician or general if it’s weilded by the right random person at the right time and location.
There’s a reason every American was raised on the mantra of “violence is never the answer” and “if you fight back you’re just as bad.”
Peaceful protest against tyrannical governments only work if they’re seen as an opening offer backed by the potential for non-peaceful escalation.
Too bad one party decided that guns were bad and spent the last 50 years disarming itself.
First of all, “one party” simply asked for regulation instead of bending over for the NRA without it even reaching around to return the courtesy. Second, there is a reason why lone gunmen shoot up schools and not military bases.
The NRA, which has been proven to be fu ded by Russia.
What are you gonna do when the government comes after you with your scrawny ass weapon? It’ll work against a neighbor, sure, but the military can see through your walls using wifi alone. There’s a literal helicopter above your house tracking your every move. They know more about you than you realize. This is the strongest army in the world we’re talking about.
And, even if violence sounds tempting, there are so many things to do before any of that, like resist and organize. You can definitely fight back in man other ways besides a picket sign and a gun. I’m not sure why those are the only two options.
You don’t get in a tank fight with a pistol. Pick your battles.
United Healthcare just lost 80 billion in value when some rando took out its CEO.
The same thing al quaeda did in Afghanistan I presume
No way that would work here. We have like, grass and stuff. The sand helps to… slow them down or something…
It’s not that funny but I’m poking at the anti 2A people who always ask what you plan to do with your rifle against an apache helicopter. There’s good examples to point to as you noted, but I’m more interested in the obvious counter point, which is what are you going to do to that apache without a gun? I never hear an answer to that one. Obviously nobody on the ground is going to be having a good time in that situation but at the end of the day I’d rather be taking shots at it than throwing rocks or just lying face down and hoping they miss me.
resisting and organizing are necessary steps.
Do you really think they’ll be effective against the man that will happily mow down the people resisting?
When one side is ready to use violence and the other side is not, the other side always loses.
We’re still monkeys with sticks over here.
Is he mowing people down? He’s purging and people are resisting, as they should. And despite that the only threat has been towards us foreigners. You have more to worry about your fellow bleeding heart patriots. Arm yourselves against those first if you must.
Let’s let this post sit here and we’ll see who rusts first
Alright, fine by me.
This is such a crazy assertion. I know plenty of democrats who own guns. They just generally don’t make it their personality.
It also ignores the massive arms difference between a government of today and its citizens vs when the constitution was written.
Lots of change has happened in the US as the result of protests that go violent, but none have ever succeeded using guns.
The point of the second amendment isn’t to go toe-to-toe with the military and never has been. It’s to make every citizen a potential threat to those in power, and to allow for guerilla warfare.
A pistol can’t beat a tank, but it can kill a politician or general if it’s weilded by the right random person at the right time and location.
True. The original point was for ordinary citizens to return escaped slaves at gunpoint.
https://www.npr.org/2021/06/02/1002107670/historian-uncovers-the-racist-roots-of-the-2nd-amendment