Are You An NRA Member?

[NickViar]

@thunderbolt23

As for me, I want 2d Amendment freedoms to be mainstream and - wait for it - normal - I like open carry, some level of carry on campuses even, and a more fluid gun market, and we certainly aren’t going to get there with a left-liberal Democrat in office. But then ,I have no interest in defining myself as “rebellious” because, well, I grew up.

@thunderbolt23

I just saw this, and I’ll take a shot at it.

First, assuming the really wild fantasy world of basically all the citizens versus the entire government:

The government does not produce the weapons. It buys them. The government has piles of weapons of course, but the private sector - the engineers, the defense companies, the materials companies, etc. - are in private hands. So, in one sense, we are in a different position than having a few muskets to storm the Bastille. The technology and mass production is in the citizens’ hands.

But the government has the advantage of having weapons now along with the logistics and infrastructure to use them. Could the citizens - owners of the economy - survive the onslaught enough to then turn the citizen might against the government? My guess is…probably? In part because…

I suspect that much of the military has a very strong civic duty to the government, but once the government “turned” on its people (in our very fantastical example), I do believe their would be a breakdown in discipline and loyalty, at least enough to cause serious logistical problems that the military relies on. Then, of course, Team Citizen gets legions of trained soldiers joining up.

The population is very, very, very large. And pretty smart.

I guess I would say the citizenry could beat back the government, in large part because every conventional war, there comes a time where it becomes a contest of economic productivity (if you can survive long enough). In that scenario, advantage citizens. And of course, on the non-material side, the contest of wills would go to the citizens. I would never put good money against angry, free Westerners who have made up their mind to beat back tyranny.

@thunderbolt23

No, you completely missed it. Liberals don’t like judiciaries that protect rights - they like judiciaries that invent rights and remove them from the democratic process. They also like the judiciary to take away democratic powers to make law when Liberals don’t like the policy results the laws, by way of majoritarianism, are achieving.

In short, Liberals don’t want judges to be judges - they want them to be all-wise oligarchic rulers that make policy that Liberals prefer because stubborn legislatures won’t, i.e., provide an end-around the legislative process.

@thunderbolt23

Before rushing to applaud them, ask yourself if they are doing anything of substance.

If the USSC finds that the 2d Am is not an unalloyed individual right and more of a collective right that allows states to have higher restrictions on gun ownership - which I think would be wrong - how does that affect Montana’s right to have strong individual rights for its citizens?

A “collective right” win doesn’t mean Montana has to suddenly restrict its citizens’ gun rights - it means that the federal constitution won’t get in the way if states decide to get very restrictive.

What happened in the last eight years or so, tb?