N
niceatheist
Guest
I don’t think one needs to have a crystal ball to tell how Stalin or Mao would have responded, or what the end result would have been.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
They way they did, perhaps, but to claim the people are better off not being able to resist is submission to such actions.I don’t think one needs to have a crystal ball to tell how Stalin or Mao would have responded, or what the end result would have been.
P
Peebo
Guest
Thank you…I’m glad someone can see futility of comparing the two countries…I’m not trying to show the US in a bad light as I live here and enjoy living here…and I own guns and don’t have a problem with them…I agree that we in the US have the right to defend ourselves and our families and others with lethal force if need be…I also think Australians should have that right also.
N
niceatheist
Guest
The weapons available to nation states, especially the larger ones, make the idea of a citizen militia rising up against tyranny laughable. In fact it was absurd even in the 18th century. The American Revolutionaries, as brave as they were, would have been doomed without France’s assistance.
Last edited:
Submit and be dominated.The weapons available to nation states, especially the larger ones, make the idea of a citizen militia rising up against tyranny laughable.
N
niceatheist
Guest
You live Ina fantasy world if you think a citizen militia could take on the might of an industrialized military power. In such a tyranny you would give up your guns freely or they would indeed take them from your cold bloody hands.
More submit to all powerful government.You live Ina fantasy world if you think a citizen militia could take on the might of an industrialized military power. In such a tyranny you would give up your guns freely or they would indeed take them from your cold bloody hands.
Nothing in this world is guaranteed. But rights are not determined by such guarantees. Whether or not you think a citizen militia would be successful is irrelevant.
And again, those who favor big government over individual rights often live under the impression that the American military would stand by a tyrant and turn their weapons inward. We can see right now in Virginia that local law enforcement is standing up to proposed statutes intended to confiscate the rights of the citizens, with the threat of armed forces being sent into communities to impose such authoritarianism.
That’s not what I was taught, even 40+ years ago. I was taught that the revolutionary forces probably could not have prevailed without the French.
But then, the revolution would have not existed at all without an armed citizenry. The French did not win at Lexington and Concord.
But then, the revolution would have not existed at all without an armed citizenry. The French did not win at Lexington and Concord.
N
niceatheist
Guest
The Second Amendment is worthless as a guarantee against tyranny. If the US turns into one, the guarantee, if any, is the military itself. The lessons of the last two centuries is that even the bravest bands of freedom fighters are doomed without external support. As as I said I’m the Founding Father talked a big game, but without France’s significant aid, whatever their high ideals, the British would have won.
So let tyranny reign.The Second Amendment is worthless as a guarantee against tyranny.
That seems to be argument.
But that isn’t the purpose of the second amendment. The purpose is to protect the inherent right, and prevent government from confiscation of that, and other rights.
Irrelevant to the fact that the people have an inherent right, protected by the constitution.If the US turns into one, the guarantee, if any, is the military itself.
There are numerous reasons for that right.
The lesson of the last two centuries is that tyrants seems to disagree with you. They have all believed it was important to disarm the populace. And that’s what all of them have done.The lessons of the last two centuries is that even the bravest bands of freedom fighters are doomed without external support.
How successful would the French had been without an armed American citizenry?As as I said I’m the Founding Father talked a big game, but without France’s significant aid, whatever their high ideals, the British would have won.
N
niceatheist
Guest
The inherent right is worthless if the people are crushed by the tyrantsz and that has happened time and time again. As often as not, it’s either soldiers refusing to leave their baracks or officers coups that have toppled tyrants.
Last edited:
You seem to want avoid questions.The inherent right is worthless if the people are crushed by the tyrantsz and that has happened time and time again?
How successful would the French have been had it not been for an armed American citizenry?
How about this: should the French resistance laid down their arms because the German military was so far superior?
N
niceatheist
Guest
Without Allied aid and intelligence the French Resistance would have been doomed
Last edited:
That wasn’t the question. My question was should they have laid down their arms because the German military was so far superior?Without Allied aid and intelligence the French Resistance would have been doomed
N
niceatheist
Guest
Keep in mind that various Resistance groups in WWII were receiving Allied aid? If nothing else, Germany had to commit vast resources on the Atlantic Coast and in the Eastern Theater so various Resistance groups got oxygen even from that. In isolation, such groups would have been doomed, or at best been geurilla force.
H
Hume
Guest
You’re missing it so badly that this really is my last shot.but you quoted the higher price of the auto, a cheaply made ar would not carry that cost. I can buy a cheap one for about $500. nobody would pay $10k even on a black market.
There is nothing more intrinsically expensive about an M4 than a Colt LE6920 other than supply and demand in the CONTEXT OF A SOFT BAN.
One is around $10k, one is around $1k. They cost roughly the same to make.
This is what bans do. They manipulate economics.
Vis a vis, after they are banned, No. You will not be able to buy the cheap $500 AR15s on the black market. No one will sell them for that.
“This ‘cheap AR’ is a banned gun, bubba. You can’t get it at a store anymore. $500?!? I want two large, cash, or get out of my face.”
And then there’s the chance that your seller is a cop looking to lasso perps. Welcome to black markets.
Sure, the Brits let them to make the problem go away.yet the IRA is part of the government and still around
Be perfectly clear, the IRA wanted “One Ireland”. As most rebels do, they failed.
T
Theo520
Guest
You misunderstand the role and impact guerrilla warfare can have in a conflict.You live Ina fantasy world if you think a citizen militia could take on the might of an industrialized military power. In such a tyranny you would give up your guns freely or they would indeed take them from your cold bloody hands.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.