2 ms·
Either way, so long as it's legal to have guns, but they are disproportionally distributed along political lines, it makes sense to try to counterbalance that.
by int_19h 1y ago
Either way, so long as it's legal to have guns, but they are disproportionally distributed along political lines, it makes sense to try to counterbalance that.
As it is, with gun ownership leaning firmly right, Trump has a massive number of armed paramilitaries that he could lean on. In any large-scale suppression of political dissent, those would be the people breaking your door at night, not uniformed feds (there simply isn't enough of the latter). Thus even if you're anti-gun in principle, it still makes sense for left-leaning people in this country to arm given the overall political climate.
- sorcerer-mar 1y agoIf for no other reason than to disabuse right wingers of the notion, as much as possible, that the left wing isn't armed. Which FWIW I think left-wingers are actually quite a bit more armed than the ammosexuals would presume.
- int_19h 1y agoThere's more of us than conventional wisdom would have you believe, but the disparity is still very large.
- majormajor 1y agoYou're gonna have better luck leaving the country before the civil war than you are shooting the people trying to break into your house in that scenario. There are at least a couple million "regular" US soldiers + feds; if we're worried about millions more private citizens on top of that, what exactly is the gameplan to win in any meaningful sense regardless?
- sorcerer-mar 1y agoThe gameplan is for people to quickly realize that it's not just a "rape and pillage whatever you want" type of mission they're embarking on. The vast majority of people have little appetite for actual resistance (as your comments reveal), and so a little resistance will very likely go a long way. There are far more people willing to defend their homes than there are people willing to get shot in the face breaking into someone's home.