4 ms·

The point of armed citizens is not them winning a civil war, but making the restrictions politicians have to subject themselves to, to remain safe, sufficiently

The point of armed citizens is not them winning a civil war, but making the restrictions politicians have to subject themselves to, to remain safe, sufficiently inconvenient. No more cinema, golf, theater, water park, mountain hiking or yachting. Not being able to take a walk within half a mile of your property's border, always waiting for security to check the cars you are about to use, often having them tell you that you cannot go to xyz, because they lack manpower (or whatever reason) to secure the routes. Citizens having access to weapons is a deal with the politicians that their daily lifes will only be as great as those of their subjects.

antod 3y ago
As a non American, the expectation that your democracy only survives because your elected dictators-in-waiting are too scared to take the mask off is such a weird concept. There are no (or very few) other democracies with that culture. From the outside, it seems that culture and those attitudes are more likely to erode your democracy than protect it. A tiny minority viewpoint could create that fear, get that protection enabled, and then you've lost that leverage over the politicians you're touting. As democracies go, US politicians are already the most removed from contact with their citizens - it already seems like you're in a vicious circle here. Politicians fearing their citizens doesn't seem like a good basis to form a healthy democracy on.
- dudul 3y ago
  Not all politicians are in DC. The US actually has a lot of local elections and votes. More than in many democracies. Yeah it doesn't get a lot of air time on CNN but local elections matter a lot in the US. And yes, constitutions should be designed to keep representatives in check and afraid of messing with the people. A constitution should restrict the power of a government and empower the citizens.
wolverine876 3y ago
The point of the second amendment is to threaten the lives of politicians?

antod 3y ago

As a non American, the expectation that your democracy only survives because your elected dictators-in-waiting are too scared to take the mask off is such a weird concept. There are no (or very few) other democracies with that culture. From the outside, it seems that culture and those attitudes are more likely to erode your democracy than protect it. A tiny minority viewpoint could create that fear, get that protection enabled, and then you've lost that leverage over the politicians you're touting. As democracies go, US politicians are already the most removed from contact with their citizens - it already seems like you're in a vicious circle here. Politicians fearing their citizens doesn't seem like a good basis to form a healthy democracy on.

dudul 3y ago
Not all politicians are in DC. The US actually has a lot of local elections and votes. More than in many democracies. Yeah it doesn't get a lot of air time on CNN but local elections matter a lot in the US. And yes, constitutions should be designed to keep representatives in check and afraid of messing with the people. A constitution should restrict the power of a government and empower the citizens.

wolverine876 3y ago

The point of the second amendment is to threaten the lives of politicians?