Quote:
Originally Posted by broke
While you may have read history, you clearly don't understand it. Plus, you continue to miss the point...
The 'thugs' are using small arms because it's the least amount of force they need to subdue the crowds. If the crowds had small arms, do you not think the Iranian government would roll in artillery and tanks? If the crowd had artillery and tanks do you think the Iranian government would not call in the air power? End of the day, the mob will STILL be dead.
It's never been about righteousness. It's always been about force.
The second amendment was written when the arms the citizenry could hold MATCHED the arms of the military. That condition doesn't exist anymore - in any 'state'. Any sense of security you have with your gun locker is simply a false sense of security.
It's that simple.
|
your point is taken. However life is full of examples where the where the lesser armed side wins a war. A man with a handgun & an intelligent mind can beat a man with a machine gun & no brains.
it may even come to pass the iranians win their freedom with no arms at all, through mass bloodshed that causes a rift in the military. at some point an army thinks twice about butchering its own, unless the soldiers are imported.
but the second amendment does allow individuals to protect themselves with arms. This will not help the individual in a fight with the military. but that is not useful in the case of the US, where our military is compised of our own people. Rather, the second amendment does help the people defend their liberty from the tyranny of the mafia, criminal gangs & KKK types, in absence of a police that cannot protect all people at all times. this is a freedom that should not be relinquished, as criminals do not follow laws.