Moral of the story is to no longer elect democrats!
1 Like
Damn Dems and their FakeNews hiding the coverage of Republicans getting up in arms after the govt went tyrannical.
Shits been going on for longer than we knew.
#staywoke
Frankly, I’m just tired of repeating myself because no one cares or listens anyway.
Have you defined what would have to happen for you to take up arms before and I missed it?
Id put it akin to what I’ve been saying to Pat in the should he stand thread. People like to pretend like they have a tipping point when the vast majority of time they just don’t. They’re talking to make themselves feel better (not referring to you specifically here).
I don’t own a crystal ball. It is impossible for me to know what future event(s) will be the tipping point. There is also no way for me to know what percentage of gun owners will or will not actually take up arms vs. are full of shit. Loppar and I havr had this exact conversation at least 3x in the last 6 months.
I need to start copying my answers into a doc to saveme time.
Ok, I’ll ask it differently.
Who here doesn’t believe we have a right to resist, even with our own violence, some unbearable level of oppression and violence against us?
Yes, despite futility.
What do you mean by ‘right’? If it’s ‘the govt is prohibited from infringing upon my actions in this regard,’ then no.
Devils advocate here but right or wrong, is that not the risk they take by coming to America illegally? That sounds like a giant loop hole waiting to happen.
Could you clarify? I’m not sure I understand your answer. You do not see yourself as having a right to self defense?
Timothy McVeigh tried to have an uprising but that was covered quite a bit. Maybe that hurts my argument for guns, though. Shit.
1 Like
No, because we are morally responsible for our response to their illegal action. Consider an absurd hypothetical: If we decided to deter illegal immigration by mining the border, would anyone argue that we weren’t morally culpable for blowing up children? Would anyone really argue ‘Hey, they knew the minefield was there, so it’s their fault, not ours’?
Sure. Say someone decides (sincerely) that the government has become ‘unbearably oppressive’ because they (the individual) don’t like the new auto-emission standards. They engage in violent resistance–blow up a building, or something. Consistent with the (possible) premise of your question, could they argue that their actions are protected by their “right to resist,” and thus they can’t be prosecuted for what is (under other circumstances) unambiguously a crime?
Edit: McVeigh is an excellent, albeit horrifying, example of what I’m referring to. (In my light-hearted hypothetical, scores of people, including children, didn’t die.)
Did the before mentioned-native not have a right to defend himself? Did the african slave not have a right to wrench free the rifle of his master, even killing him with it, in order to begin his flight to a free state? I’m not asking for the Union Soldier’s/Confederate soldier’s belief. I’m asking for the beliefs of yourselves?
Do we have the right to use even violence at some point, no matter how futile or daunting?
Is the “sure” of your answer sincere? You say “sure,” and then give an example you undoubtedly do not believe would be a just exercise of said right. I am asking if you believe there is ANY level. Not necessarily the level of a McVeigh. ANY level.
What if they keep coming back? They will probably get in eventually if there is no punishment. Again just to clarify, not for taking the children…
If you knowingly walk into a minefield, ya, Darwin and I won’t feel too sorry.
Forget emissions. You are a slave on a plantation. What then?
You are the Native American to be forced on the march? What then?
And even on a practical level (the question of futility)…Who says arms would be used outright to defeat the US military? What about situations to simply extricate important assets to a resistance that doesn’t even think it can win military? To subdue, or even kill, local police before reinforcements/full-scale military units show up? The assets I’m speaking of are the author’s of influential liberation propaganda. What if it is ultimately the 1st, with some assists by the 2nd, in the hands of skillful and persuasive philosophers? Authors whose writings are more prolific because of the one or more times they were whisked away as men dedicated to their cause battled police in sacrifice to their ideals?
Yo, law enforcement, I am talking about a hypothetical totalitarian future!!
Edit: I can’t have some fed misunderstanding that I’m trying to rile up an emissions rebellion, for goodness sake.
No, that is not exactly true. For some guns represent freedom, others they are a sign of masculinity.
You try too hard. Good trolling should appear effortless. You can’t even take a joke.
How am I trolling?