3 ms·

Overthrowing the Government is such a tired 2A argument to make, you have an AR-15 legally, it isn’t going to work well against a tank, or an F35. You can have

Overthrowing the Government is such a tired 2A argument to make, you have an AR-15 legally, it isn’t going to work well against a tank, or an F35. You can have as many guns as you want, you are still hopelessly outgunned.

vinyl7 4y ago
Guerilla warfare is extremely effective
seanw444 4y ago
The Taliban would like to have a word with you. Insurgency is hard to beat when you have a motivated enemy. And enacting outrageous gun laws is one way to motivate people. Not to mention, that's not a good argument against the 2A. "Technology has advanced, and only the Federal government has that technology. Guess the 2A is pointless now and doesn't matter." Sounds to me like we deserve more access to advanced technology. Friendly reminder that private citizens owned warships.
- 29083011397778 4y ago
  And at least one guy was owed a fighter jet by a corporation [0]. My only response to your warship quip and Pepsi owing some dude a fighter jet is to shake my head and think "Only in America". [0] https://thehustle.co/leonard-v-pepsi-harrier-jet-lawsuit/ https://thehustle.co/leonard-v-pepsi-harrier-jet-lawsuit/
nathanaldensr 4y ago
Like most people who assume the federal government is omnipotent, you greatly underestimate the sheer size of the country and just how many soldiers (and ammunition, equipment, and, most importantly, fuel) it would take to control all of it. It's impossible, and it's not even close. The most an authoritarian dictator could hope for is to control a few major cities--places where much of the population already willingly disarms itself against government tyranny.
dredds 4y ago
'Overthrowing the Government' in a strongly Balkanized 2 party system is more likely the prelude to another civil war, especially when one party considers an attack on the capital as 'legitimate political discourse' [0]. 'Overthrowing the Government WE don't agree with' is the real subtext here. "A majority of gun owners (61%) are Republicans or lean to the Republican Party, but NRA members skew even more heavily to the political right than other gun owners. Roughly three-quarters (77%) of gun owners who say they belong to the NRA are Republicans or lean Republican, while only 20% are Democrats or lean Democratic." [1] [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/04/us/politics/republicans-jan-6-cheney-censure.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/04/us/politics/republicans-j... [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/07/05/among-gun-owners-nra-members-have-a-unique-set-of-views-and-experiences/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/07/05/among-gun-o...
- seanw444 4y ago
  So why don't people arm themselves? Choosing not to exercise a right does not mean you can take the right away from those who choose to.
  - dredds 4y ago
    > "Choosing not to exercise a right does not mean you can take the right away from those who choose to." The Supreme Court begs to differ on something so simple as a woman and her own eggs. Can't have it both ways. Having more guns than people while taking away people's right to vote, or right to basic health services etc, is a recipe for disaster.
    - notch656a 4y ago
      This is disingenuous. There isn't a constitutionally enumerated right to an abortion, so the tenth amendment relegates this decision to the states. There is a constitutionally enumerate right to keep and bear arms. Also worth noting the counter argument is that the fetus and the mother may have competing interest. The controversy and lack of guidance in the constitution means democratic process within the states may not be the worst way to go about this.

vinyl7 4y ago

Guerilla warfare is extremely effective

seanw444 4y ago

The Taliban would like to have a word with you. Insurgency is hard to beat when you have a motivated enemy. And enacting outrageous gun laws is one way to motivate people. Not to mention, that's not a good argument against the 2A. "Technology has advanced, and only the Federal government has that technology. Guess the 2A is pointless now and doesn't matter." Sounds to me like we deserve more access to advanced technology. Friendly reminder that private citizens owned warships.

29083011397778 4y ago
And at least one guy was owed a fighter jet by a corporation [0]. My only response to your warship quip and Pepsi owing some dude a fighter jet is to shake my head and think "Only in America". [0] https://thehustle.co/leonard-v-pepsi-harrier-jet-lawsuit/ https://thehustle.co/leonard-v-pepsi-harrier-jet-lawsuit/

nathanaldensr 4y ago

Like most people who assume the federal government is omnipotent, you greatly underestimate the sheer size of the country and just how many soldiers (and ammunition, equipment, and, most importantly, fuel) it would take to control all of it. It's impossible, and it's not even close. The most an authoritarian dictator could hope for is to control a few major cities--places where much of the population already willingly disarms itself against government tyranny.

dredds 4y ago

'Overthrowing the Government' in a strongly Balkanized 2 party system is more likely the prelude to another civil war, especially when one party considers an attack on the capital as 'legitimate political discourse' [0]. 'Overthrowing the Government WE don't agree with' is the real subtext here. "A majority of gun owners (61%) are Republicans or lean to the Republican Party, but NRA members skew even more heavily to the political right than other gun owners. Roughly three-quarters (77%) of gun owners who say they belong to the NRA are Republicans or lean Republican, while only 20% are Democrats or lean Democratic." [1] [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/04/us/politics/republicans-jan-6-cheney-censure.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/04/us/politics/republicans-j... [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/07/05/among-gun-owners-nra-members-have-a-unique-set-of-views-and-experiences/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/07/05/among-gun-o...

seanw444 4y ago
So why don't people arm themselves? Choosing not to exercise a right does not mean you can take the right away from those who choose to.
- dredds 4y ago
  > "Choosing not to exercise a right does not mean you can take the right away from those who choose to." The Supreme Court begs to differ on something so simple as a woman and her own eggs. Can't have it both ways. Having more guns than people while taking away people's right to vote, or right to basic health services etc, is a recipe for disaster.
  - notch656a 4y ago
    This is disingenuous. There isn't a constitutionally enumerated right to an abortion, so the tenth amendment relegates this decision to the states. There is a constitutionally enumerate right to keep and bear arms. Also worth noting the counter argument is that the fetus and the mother may have competing interest. The controversy and lack of guidance in the constitution means democratic process within the states may not be the worst way to go about this.