4 ms·
good point, but i'm speaking from a US-centric point of view. and so is this article. so i don't think the your taliban argument is a strong counterpoint to my
by greenie_beans 5y ago
good point, but i'm speaking from a US-centric point of view. and so is this article. so i don't think the your taliban argument is a strong counterpoint to my claim.
- lowkey_ 5y agoThe Taliban was fighting against the US though, with all their high-tech drones and such, which are usually cited as the reason that guns are futile against the state.
- greenie_beans 5y agoi don’t know enough about the military strategy that allowed the taliban to seize control, so i can’t argue with you there. but i do want to point out how your argument could be interpreted as advocating for guns so a tyrannical regime like the taliban can take over a government.
- lowkey_ 5y agoThat is fair and I agree with the assessment! My argument is advocating for guns so that a population can determine its own fate, and not be subject to either domestic or foreign top-down control against its own will.