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 Nanocyte
I want to start this by saying that this is not another gun control thread. There are more than enough of those for now, so I hope we can keep this on topic.
Having said that, the most prevalent argument for unrestricted gun rights seems to be that we need to be armed in order to defend ourselves from government tyranny. The thing is that we've already lost a lot of rights with the PATRIOT act, NDAA, etc., our tax dollars have been wasted in futile, illegal, and immoral wars, we have an absurd amount of people in prison for crimes that I'm sure many of us think shouldn't be crimes, and the list goes on. But so far, none of the government's incursions upon our freedoms, aside from proposals to unrestricted access to and possession of firearms, has sparked any serious talk of armed resistance. So I'm wondering, other than if the government were to come in and try to take your weapons, what kind of situation do you imagine occurring in which you would actually initiate or take part in an armed rebellion against the government? In what kind of situation would you use a firearm against law enforcement, military, or other members of the government? How effective do you think your opposition would be, what would your ultimate goals be, and what events do you see taking place between now and then that would create such a situation?
Now, I understand that the second amendment was intended as a safeguard and that many people feel that they need to remain armed at all times to preserve a free state, even without any apparent threat, but many people seem to be of the mind that danger to our freedoms significant to enough to warrant armed resistance is imminent, and that any restrictions on their rights to obtain any weapons they choose will be preemptive to the government taking actions that they wouldn't have been able to with an armed citizenry,
Again, this thread is not about gun rights or the second amendment. I'm simply curious about situations in which you think you would actually need to invoke your second amendment rights and engage in armed conflict with the government.edit on 2-1-2013 by Nanocyte because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by abeverage
reply to post by johncarter
I am going to give you a different scenario that is surely happening since the corrupt power elite also love war and death. The gun and ammo industries have seen a massive spike 39-45% increase in sales and stockpiling.
Now if by Obama and his cronies you mean Congress we are on the same page...if however you mean that same old tried and true Liberals vs. Conservatives, Democrats vs. Republicans tripe you have a lot to learn.
I envision laws placing armed guards at Schools, Businesses and most public buildings. Not (so-called) trained Police officers but Untrained monkeys with weapons, and power trips worse then any inner city cop. Surround the enemy first then cut off the resources and access to weapons.
Then there will be no need to take away our guns. And that article is specifically stating why they wont take them away.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."