[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
…And if terrorists really wanted a nuke, they would have gotten one already from corrupt military sources in Ukraine or Georgia or some other former Soviet republic.
[/quote]
Why is that an implied absolute?
What if you’re wrong?
[/quote]
Then I will be wrong.
It happens from time to time. I’ve learned not to get too worked up over it. [/quote]
See, that’s the thing about guys like you being wrong about stuff like this. If you are, well, no big deal because you can afford to gamble big on a subject like this. No skin off your hide, or anyone else’s, if you miss the mark.
Problems arise, however, when folks at the high level roll the dice.[/quote]
Guys like us, you mean: people with no actual influence on foreign policy.
I was thinking about this subject this morning. I know your opinion of the second amendment, and you know mine.
Tell me: should you be allowed to own a handgun, given your opinions about the depradations of the federal government in general, and the present administration in particular?
Silly question, I know. Of course you should. What threat to the federal government could you possibly pose all by yourself with a dinky little pistol?
Okay, but what about a rifle? Not just any rifle, but a Barrett .50? Still no law says you can’t have one, not in Montana anyway.
Never mind rifles, then. Should you be allowed to own an M2 machine gun? You can have one, you know. Just pay your transfer tax. In fact, scratch that. You wanna dream? Dream big. A 30mm chain gun. Ammo might be a bit hard to come by at Cabela’s, and it does retail for 115 dollars per round, but let’s say you have a very good friend at the ATK plant in Lewiston who gives you one hell of a deal.
Now let’s say you want to mount your new toy on an aircraft. What better than that surplus Apache you’ve had your eye on for awhile on eBay. Fifty million dollars and it’s yours. We’ll assume you have the necessary skills and licenses necessary to fly this particular aircraft.
Well, naturally your new toy has raised a few eyebrows, and one of your neighbors (the one you’ve been exchanging random insults with over the barbed wire fence for the last few years) has taken it upon himself to take pot shots at your helicopter with his 12-gauge every now and then. You respond by paying the neighborhood punks to poison his dog. But so far neither of you have gone to “the authorities” with your grievances.
The fact is, nothing you’ve done is against the law. Well, the dog poisoning thing is kind of sketchy, but it’s not like you’ve strafed his house or anything.
My question is, do you have a right to own thy helicopter and its cannon, under the second amendment? My answer is yes. It is an arm, and you are bearing it, as part of a well-regulated militia comprising yourself, defending your particular corner of a free state. Should the fact that you MIGHT strafe your neighbor’s house, or the IRS office in Kalispell, or the Federal Building in Helena, or even (if you could arrange the ridiculous logistical feat of transport), the White House in Washington, be just cause for ATF agents to raid your property, destroy your helicopter and burn down your house?
After all, you’ve gone on record criticizing the actions of the Federal Government. You are clearly a Rogue Citizen.
