3 ms·
If you're going by second amendment rights, at this point it's more to the spirit of it for civillian fighter jets and tanks to be legalized than guns. To some
by Mononokay 9y ago
If you're going by second amendment rights, at this point it's more to the spirit of it for civillian fighter jets and tanks to be legalized than guns.
To some extent, I actually imagine it'd be safer for the average citizen.
* * *
From a more protectionist standpoint, you could say that an AR-15 or an AK-47 will allow you to stand up against your government. This isn't really realistic, however - no civillian weapon, especially not a semi-automatic rifle, will reliably take care of a tank, fighter jet, drone or military robot. [0]
[0] http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150715-killer-robots-the-soldiers-that-never-sleep http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150715-killer-robots-the-s...
- reitanqild 9y ago> From a more protectionist standpoint, you could say that an AR-15 or an AK-47 will allow you to stand up against your government. This isn't really realistic, however - no civillian weapon, especially not a semi-automatic rifle, will reliably take care of a tank, fighter jet, drone or military robot. [0] It gives you some leverage however if you need to get some ingredients for your IEDs. A few guns might make the difference between efficient large scale killings like Auschwitz and a case where a large number of civilians get away and hide until the international community can come and help.
- DuskStar 9y agoYep, people with rifles and improvised explosives are completely ineffective against a modern military force. That's why the US was in and out of Afghanistan in less than a year! Oh wait.