The most popular single example of which was the Battle of Athens, where returning WW2 veterans used firearms to fight back against their corrupt local government that was using police brutality and voter intimidation to remain in power.
Then there’s the rabbit hole of the whole Jim Crow era of American history. Back then local law enforcement was often allied or directly members of the Ku Klux Klan and would harass black communities at night. These communities would form an armed militia to protect their neighbors from government sanctioned violence.
Ultimately, the whole anti-gun debate hinges on public trust of the government and law enforcement. You limit the possession of guns to people in positions of public trust and allow them to police the community and keep you safe from danger. When those people are the danger however, you only have America’s legal system to defend you. We obviously don’t allow the police to be openly corrupt. However what happens when all branches of government to the highest level are corrupt and you become an enemy of the state? Appeasing the government by giving up the one measly way you have of resisting them is not going to spare you.
Oh no there are plenty of other examples involving federal agencies, but they’re far more rare. A big part of how the second amendment helps is that it prevents the government from even trying. It’s much harder to quietly disappear people in the middle of the night with secret police when the attempt would cause a a loud and deadly shootout that would rile up the rest of the rabble nationwide.
The pentagon isn’t relevant, that’s a military institution.
Well perhaps all they have to do is not kill people who say: “Yo, people shouldn’t be starving or homeless.” and maybe they wouldn’t get people ready to defend themselves.
Need to get my weapons ready.
I say this without condemning or condoning your statement, but comments like this are the reason why they are doing this.
I say this wholeheartedly, fuck right off with that bullshit.
Lol
No, they’d be doing it anyway, with or without you fighting back. It’s your choice whether you want to make it easy for them to do so.
It’s not. They’re doing it as a form of political intimidation. It’s a problem that the second amendment in America exists to solve
Has it? When?
Oh a number of times throughout American history.
The most popular single example of which was the Battle of Athens, where returning WW2 veterans used firearms to fight back against their corrupt local government that was using police brutality and voter intimidation to remain in power.
Then there’s the rabbit hole of the whole Jim Crow era of American history. Back then local law enforcement was often allied or directly members of the Ku Klux Klan and would harass black communities at night. These communities would form an armed militia to protect their neighbors from government sanctioned violence.
Ultimately, the whole anti-gun debate hinges on public trust of the government and law enforcement. You limit the possession of guns to people in positions of public trust and allow them to police the community and keep you safe from danger. When those people are the danger however, you only have America’s legal system to defend you. We obviously don’t allow the police to be openly corrupt. However what happens when all branches of government to the highest level are corrupt and you become an enemy of the state? Appeasing the government by giving up the one measly way you have of resisting them is not going to spare you.
That’s against the local police though. My guess is your 2nd amendment won’t be worth much against the pentagon.
Oh no there are plenty of other examples involving federal agencies, but they’re far more rare. A big part of how the second amendment helps is that it prevents the government from even trying. It’s much harder to quietly disappear people in the middle of the night with secret police when the attempt would cause a a loud and deadly shootout that would rile up the rest of the rabble nationwide.
The pentagon isn’t relevant, that’s a military institution.
Well perhaps all they have to do is not kill people who say: “Yo, people shouldn’t be starving or homeless.” and maybe they wouldn’t get people ready to defend themselves.