An Anonymous Coward writes:
A gunman fired upon thousands of people attending a music festival on the Las Vegas Strip Sunday night, in a brutal attack that is blamed for at least 58 deaths, police say. In the mass shooting and panic that ensued, 515 people were injured. At least one of the dead is an off-duty police officer who was attending the concert.
Editorializing: Interesting how media always emphasize ISLAMIC terrorists, but downplay domestic terrorism as psychologically disturbed individual lone-wolfs.
And how do you propose to resist tyrannical tanks and nukes with small arms? We're going to need something a little bigger to make good on the revolutionary promise of the 2nd amendment.
It's called guerrilla warfare. Look it, and our record at fighting against it, up.
And don't even bother bringing up nukes or any other broad scope weapons. The government can't use them against its citizens. It would destroy its own means of feeding itself. The only way we were able to survive the first civil war with anything resembling a government was because the government could still draw resources from the north. When the entire nation is both battlefield and larder, the government stands zero chance.
Yeah, governments don't generally first strike their own citizens. But what kind of credible threat do you pose in a true revolutionary scenario? What is the scenario? Do you even have a plan for how things go down? Or are you just another sucker played by the marketing arm of a massive corporate oligarchy, threatening to eclipse government itself in power and authority, tricked into giving up your money to buy more and more guns you'll never use based on the unrealistic echoes of a past when the federal government really was small enough that personal ownership of small arms presented a credible check against totalitarianism?
I'll leave guessing that up to you. Two things to remember: I own guns and I know exactly how the government boys are trained to use them, because they trained me too.
It really is funny how the supposed revolutionaries tend to be the greatest patriots. I ask again: in what scenario do you and the rest of the loyalists in this discussion rebel against King George? If this were 1776, you'd be the ones quartering redcoats.
A candy-assed little progtard telling a veteran he's cowardly and unpatriotic? I think you need to look up the meaning of them words, boy.
Once again you have read what you want to respond to, not what I said. I literally called you a patriot. And in 1776, it would have been a similar kind of patriotism to side with the British. Which was definitely not a cowardly thing to do since it could get one killed.
Calling me a patriot in one breath then questioning my courage and patriotism in the next? What's a fellow to think except that you're being sarcastic?
OK, I apologize for the over-the-top characterization. I'm definitely not questioning anybody's patriotism here, and I certainly don't think you are a coward.
My point is merely that in a hypothetical revolutionary future, America stands in the space of the British in the revolutionary war that founded America. And I have a really hard time believing that anybody who has argued against me here would be willing to fight against America. You're all too damn patriotic.