And the Indians had guns.
If we say that Americans today are like Americans of 200 years ago or more then we are saying that the Founding Fathers were no different than the current crop of politicians.
Why mention a militia?
Your actions speak louder than your words. You still have firearms? You enjoy them. #ilikegunsandusethemresponsiblybuttotesagreethattheyneedtobeoutlawedforthemostpart
/sarcasm
1 Like
No, I didn’t assume that.
Americans had all kinds of problems killing each other and there was a clear delineation between factions. North and South. There were two armies for crying out loud. There would be no such distinction here.
You seem to be under the impression a rebel force would, I don’t know, hold meet and greets at the local gun shop in whatever hypothetical we’re talking about. The government wouldn’t know who is or isn’t fighting them. They’d have to gather that intelligence the same as we do now.
Nice deflection.
Yes, please, continue to point out the slaughter and massacre governments are willing to do. Now, if you’ll just turn over your weapons. Or, at least list your address as an owner.
1 Like
Why not?
Because in justifying their rebellion the fancied themselves heirs to the English Parliamentary Tradition and the 1689 Bill of Rights that protected the Protestant citizens against a crypto-Catholic King like James II:
The Bill of Rights 1689 allowed Protestant citizens of England to “have Arms for their Defence suitable to their Conditions and as allowed by Law” and restricted the ability of the English Crown to have a standing army or to interfere with Protestants’ right to bear arms “when Papists were both Armed and Imployed contrary to Law” and established that Parliament, not the Crown, could regulate the right to bear arms
That’s an assumption that history has proven false. Not every American was in favor of the War for Independence. One of the rules of tyrants is divide and conquer.
They are called collaborators, your neighbors. History has shown this to be true as well. Even children have turned in parents. Snitches get riches.
1 Like
Guns didn’t help the slaughtered.
One word. Assad.
Most tyrannical dictators kept\ keep their people in constant fear, not on their side… The only people that dictators have to please at any level are the armed ones who protect him and enforce his tyranny.
I see that this whole ‘Well regulated militia’ part is being argued to death. It’s there for one reason for the government to have a healthy fear of it’s populous. It means they don’t have all the weapons and can unleash on the populous anything anyone desires. That’s it. It means nothing more than that. And it may mean nothing to us right now, but a couple generations from now may be arming themselves to go to war with the government to over throw it. The fact that it hasn’t been necessary yet is a testimony to how well crafted the government our FF left us actually is.
It’s intended for the darkest of days in America where people lose faith in the government or it’s become so ineffective that the people have to rise up in revolution.
Jefferson loved this idea. He felt a healthy revolution every 20-30 years was healthy for a free society. Something to the effect of the ‘blood of revolution’ being the fertilizer of free societies.
Ironically, he expanded the powers of the federal government more than both presidents before him.
He was a conflicted dude, what are you going to do? I actually love his comfort with paradox…
There had to be a reason.
Mkay… At this point not sure what else to say on the matter.
So, they were deliberate…
That was easy to say for him because it wasn’t his blood.
I didn’t say he was right…
It’s the idea, the assumption, that it would be American citizens vs the government when, if anything, it would be a Civil War between Americans.
1 Like
So, the founders wanted the people to keep and bear arms, without being infringed upon, so they could oppose combatants who would have military grade arms. So, by simple reasoning, they must have expected the people to infact keep the arsenals “fetishists” amass.
Ya, I’m pretty sure I’ve said that could be the case like 15x on here.
OK. The thing is, if that is the more likely scenario of the two then instead of preparing for its supposed inevitability maybe we should be observant and not allow it to happen by letting the government divide us. The problem is, IMO, people see the government as the enemy when it’s the other tribe in charge or as a friend when it is their tribe in charge.