It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by DaTroof
This is not about domestic bombers, that is against the law and is called terrorism. This is about having the same weapons that are provided by the US constitution to defend yourself and your neighborhoods against oppression.
Originally posted by Wolf321
The thing about the 2nd Amendment is that its whole reason for existing is to give the people the power to overthrow or at least resist a tyranical government. If the government restricts or prohibits the people in the type of arms they can have, especially if it is to give the government the upper hand, then to do so flies in the very face of the 2nd amendment.
Originally posted by Wolf321
Originally posted by RealSpoke
We can't overthrow this government with guns. They have a trained military, drones, heat seeking missiles, and everything else.
You can't overthrow the government with guns alone. That realization should make it clear that the government regulation or prohibition of arms is not in accordance with the letter or spirit of the 2nd Amendment.
ETA: As for the individual weapons, such as a gun, they serve a barrier to tyranny and less as a tool against it. Essentially, it keeps tyrannical forces from just coming to get you. The ability for a armed civilian population or militia, even with tanks, jets etc, to wage an offensive war against a tyrannical government is extremely small in scale and chance of success. The best action is to hold your position (using the same tools at the discretion of the tyrannical force) until they run out of resources or their forces turn on themselves. But to have a people who cannot even stand their ground only allows tyranny to gain a foothold and grow.
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I take your point on this and great thread! I'd also note..you might have killed me a time or two... grrr... but all's fair, right?
Anyway... I just can't quite get past the image of most people I've known in life actually having C-4 or access to armed remote control hardware in the real world. The occasional rocket or bomb obliterating a residential home because an idiot dumped his coke across the keyboard or got a little drunk before engaging the drone comes to mind as likely things to see happen. Heck, look at how many people get seriously hurt on Fireworks and through their own pure stupidity.
You wouldn't really advocate giving people like this access to Laws Rockets and Claymore mines.....
Originally posted by stirling
My take on this question.....
Its a well regulated militia yer after. And these kind of troops have anti tank capabilities as well as full automatic and belt fed full auto weapons....light attack vehicles maybe.....
Id say anything a paratrooper or light iinfantryman could carry or man as in crew served Milan or machine gun.106 recoiless rifle etc.......
These are the class of weapon that the 2nd is speaking of as well as all other types......50 barret, programmed bullets etc....that come down the pike....if they pertain the the militia -light infantry role......