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.
1) How do we define a tyranny?
Originally posted by ThinkingHuman
This thread is not intended to discuss neither gun control nor gun violence. There clearly is a problem with gun violence in the US. It seems unwise, however, to fix the problem of gun violence with something that may create an even greater problem, a future tyranny.
That is why I want to find out if an unarmed population can prevent a tyranny. The proponents of gun control I want to ask these 3 questions.
1) How do we define a tyranny? Does it have to start with something terrible like mass killings of people considered "undesirable"? Or could it start with something that gives the impression of trying to act in the interest of the people? Can PR be skilled enough to trick people into overlooking the signs of a beginning of a tyranny?
2) How do we know if we are moving towards a tyranny? Do we need to be able to prevent a tyranny? Is it possibly okay to have a tyranny - if the peron at the top is of good moral character?
3) How can we prevent a malevolent tyranny if We The People have no arms/weapons? Will the Democratic Party (which widely supports gun control) never elect in its Primary a Presidential candidate who will later abuse his/her power to become dictator or tyrannt? How can we look into the future to know this? Are democratic elections sufficient to prevent a tyranny? If somebody from another party gets elected and becomes tyrannical, how will the Democratic Party restore a constitutional government?
Originally posted by Rezlooper
You don't have to ask if the Dems would eventually elect someone who would impose tyrannical government...we already have him in the White House right now. This is an effort to take away guns so that he can further impose tyranny. Many of his executive orders would be found unconstitutional if they were challenged and taken to the Supreme Court. Obama is an anti-colonialist Kenyan who truly hates what America stands for...freedom and capitalism! If it were up to him, he wouldn't be going anywhere in 2016 and the first step to job security...disarm America so we have no fight in us! As the OP suggests, what would we use, knives and slingshots to stop the most powerful military in the world?
Originally posted by Alfie1
The trouble, it seems to me, with any of this armed resistance to tyranny stuff is who decides what's tyranny and what isn't.
One man's tyranny could be another man's just right policy. What mandate has any armed mob got without consulting the electors ?
Originally posted by SpearMint
I don't think an armed one could either, I think that would only prolong it and result in more deaths. The question is: Is there a need to do so? I think not. In this day and age I just don't think such a thing would happen, there's a lot of unnecessary paranoia.
About defining tyranny, it would have to be something like mass murder or marshal law to warrant firearms.