Current Events > 'We need guns to protect ourselves in the event of a tyrannical government'

(+) Yeah! (+)

Lol the government already knows your exact location, has a live listen-in to your conversations, and has everything they could ever need on you. good luck getting a civilian militia going when they can squash that shit in a heartbeat. it'd never even make its way out of the planning stages.

it's a dumb defense and if you use it you should feel dumb
---

dont question gun nut logic
---

oh this topic again, you forgot to mention the Government has drones bro.
---

I believe everything of value that needs to be said about this topic has been said in the OP.

Time to shut it down, TC.

Nice work.
---

They wouldn't need drones. Just threaten to release people's internet history and shame them into compliance.
---

Why side with "the man"
---

There has never been a point in history where the significantly more well armed and equipped side has had any difficulties.
---

"Also, we need small government. Except the military. They should be huge and high-tech as fuck."
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

There has never been a point in history where the significantly more well armed and equipped side has had any difficulties.

If you look through all those situations you'll notice they didn't want to kill civilians.
---

Webmaster4531 posted...

DifferentialEquation posted...

There has never been a point in history where the significantly more well armed and equipped side has had any difficulties.

If you look through all those situations you'll notice they didn't want to kill civilians.

Yet had no problem doing it anyways.
---

Mufflnz0rz posted...

Lol the government already knows your exact location, has a live listen-in to your conversations, and has everything they could ever need on you. good luck getting a civilian militia going when they can squash that shit in a heartbeat. it'd never even make its way out of the planning stages.

it's a dumb defense and if you use it you should feel dumb

Why does the government not use those amazing resources to crack down on gangs, if it's so insanely effective?
---

Do you honestly think the government is stupid enough to vaporize an entire city or something? What will they be in charge of then? A nuclear wasteland?

Why should I march for something that will give me less rights? That doesn't make sense at all.
---

Patchwork posted...

Why does the government not use those amazing resources to crack down on gangs, if it's so insanely effective?

This.
---

The goal of a tyrannical government is to force people into subservience, not kill them. There is no chance the US military could oppress a nation with 100 million armed adults. Guns actually would be quite effective for protection in that case.
---

Can't stop gang violence, can't stop school shootings, can't get a handle on the opiate crisis

can easily slaughter American insurgents.
---

Caution999 posted...

Do you honestly think the government is stupid enough to vaporize an entire city or something? What will they be in charge of then? A nuclear wasteland?

Not to mention all the military defectors there would be.
---

Webmaster4531 posted...

DifferentialEquation posted...

There has never been a point in history where the significantly more well armed and equipped side has had any difficulties.

If you look through all those situations you'll notice they didn't want to kill civilians.

If our government ever wanted to go tyrannical, do you think they would have the objective of killing all 300 million+ civilians? Or do you think they would be fine killing civilians indiscriminately until the rest of the population submitted? Would this work or would it create more of a resistance? Do you think they would simply try target the ones who are resisting? How would they be able to accurately identify these people? Do you think that some portion of the military and police would side with civilians? Do you think that the U.S. government attempting to kill its own people would be very complicated strategically and that being better equipped doesn't mean an instant win and that having armed civilians who resist might make a difference?
---

American history suggests that tyranny from our government will not be equally applied, and that those who talk up the necessity of the second amendment for fighting it are just as likely to cheer it on instead.
---

DifferentialEquation posted...

If our government ever wanted to go tyrannical, do you think they would have the objective of killing all 300 million+ civilians? Or do you think they would be fine killing civilians indiscriminately until the rest of the population submitted? Would this work or would it create more of a resistance? Do you think they would simply try target the ones who are resisting? How would they be able to accurately identify these people? Do you think that some portion of the military and police would side with civilians? Do you think that the U.S. government attempting to kill its own people would be very complicated strategically and that being better equipped doesn't mean an instant win and that having armed civilians who resist might make a difference?

These scenarios are based on current times.

If this ever happens it will be when there's military A.I. drones and a automated workforce.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

Webmaster4531 posted...

DifferentialEquation posted...

If our government ever wanted to go tyrannical, do you think they would have the objective of killing all 300 million+ civilians? Or do you think they would be fine killing civilians indiscriminately until the rest of the population submitted? Would this work or would it create more of a resistance? Do you think they would simply try target the ones who are resisting? How would they be able to accurately identify these people? Do you think that some portion of the military and police would side with civilians? Do you think that the U.S. government attempting to kill its own people would be very complicated strategically and that being better equipped doesn't mean an instant win and that having armed civilians who resist might make a difference?

These scenarios are based on current times.

If this ever happens it will be when there's military A.I. drones and a automated workforce.

Why would a government kill the citizens they just want to control? I don't think that makes sense.

Why would they want to control citizens when they have automation to do citizen's old jobs?
---

Antifar posted...

American history suggests that tyranny from our government will not be equally applied, and that those who talk up the necessity of the second amendment for fighting it are just as likely to cheer it on instead.

So then it's better if the people who the tyranny does apply to are unarmed? What point are you trying to make?

Mufflnz0rz posted...

Lol the government already knows your exact location

Not if you have a VPN. Checkmate governmentheists
---

_RETS_ posted...

Antifar posted...

American history suggests that tyranny from our government will not be equally applied, and that those who talk up the necessity of the second amendment for fighting it are just as likely to cheer it on instead.

So then it's better if the people who the tyranny does apply to are unarmed? What point are you trying to make?

It doesn't matter if they're armed or not; there's no support for them fighting back.

My view on the gun control is separate from the question on hypothetical armed revolution: I think guns are a public health hazard that have resulted in far too many early deaths in this country, homicidal, suicidal, and accidental. They should be treated as such. It's a daily problem that I don't think is justified by the small chance of maybe helping resist tyranny one day down the line.
---

Antifar posted...

_RETS_ posted...

Antifar posted...

American history suggests that tyranny from our government will not be equally applied, and that those who talk up the necessity of the second amendment for fighting it are just as likely to cheer it on instead.

So then it's better if the people who the tyranny does apply to are unarmed? What point are you trying to make?

It doesn't matter if they're armed or not; there's no support for them fighting back.

My view on the gun control is separate from the question on hypothetical armed revolution: I think guns are a public health hazard that have resulted in far too many early deaths in this country, homicidal, suicidal, and accidental. They should be treated as such. It's a daily problem that I don't think is justified by the small chance of maybe helping resist tyranny one day down the line.

And how about the matter of having sufficient means to defend yourself/your home/your family if the need arises?

And just the fact that so many citizens are armed is in itself a deterrent from the government ever becoming tyrannical. So if the government never does go tyrannical, the 2A has served its purpose.

_RETS_ posted...

And just the fact that so many citizens are armed is in itself a deterrent from the government ever becoming tyrannical.

The U.S. government has been tyrannical. Slavery was tyranny. Jim Crow was tyranny. The internment camps were tyranny.
---

Antifar posted...

_RETS_ posted...

And just the fact that so many citizens are armed is in itself a deterrent from the government ever becoming tyrannical.

The U.S. government has been tyrannical. Slavery was tyranny. Jim Crow was tyranny. The internment camps were tyranny.

Yes, and gun control was implemented heavily against those subject to that tyranny.

Our government has been getting fucked up by cave-dwelling goat fuckers for the past 20 years.

The Admiral posted...

The goal of a tyrannical government is to force people into subservience, not kill them. There is no chance the US military could oppress a nation with 100 million armed adults. Guns actually would be quite effective for protection in that case.

And there is no chance 100 million adults will ever be able to effectively coordinate and plan a defense when all their planning and locations are recorded. They'd be squashed before they left their houses.
---