Another Devastating School Shooting: Uvalde, Texas

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

Good. Add assault weapons to your list.

Assault weapons could be useful to citizens in situations that really might occur, such as a home invasion or to rebel against a dictatorial government.

4 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Even better for butchering a load of schoolchildren.

That's the only reason the 2nd ammendment is so popular.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Guns help install dictatorial governments.

It's what happened in Nazi Germany where the armed stormtroopers rivalled the army.

And it's what happened on 06/01 when seditionists tried to overturn the results of a democratic election.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Assault weapons are not necessary for home defense, and, because of the high powered rounds that they deliver, are detrimental fro that purpose. A home defender is just as likely to shoot a bystander in the next room or next house with his assault weapon. A shotgun is a much better weapon for home defense than an assault weapon.

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

I think a deadly, violent insurrection would be the greatest danger in regard to banning assault weapons and implementing good regulation of the keeping and bearing of arms.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

Guns make violent insurrection in America a distinct possibility.

We have our own right wing extremists, but there isno way they can legally get hold of firearms.

They have to rely on the ballot box.

And I say that as a Socialist in acountry where the Conservative party has always had a built in advantage.

Let's face it, they were in charge before we had a Democracy, they made sure the dice were loaded in their favour from the off.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Quote:

...if 4 armed people invade your home, you'll do much better with a semi-automatic rifle than with a hand gun or no gun.

Do you really live in a place where you're in fear of gangs of armed men invading your home? Do you wear a flak-jacket n your home, just in case? As InfraBlue pointed out, assault weapons aren't really suitable weapons for "home defense" or much else.. If you're really that frightened and owning an assault-styled weapon helps you to sleep at night, okay, but the weapon should never leave your home.

Quote:

Would the citizens of a dictatorship find it easier to rebel against it if they did have guns or if they'd been disarmed?

You guys are really hooked on this scenario, aren't you — what are you imagining, something like you see in the Central American banana republics or Somalia, with paramilitary groups and warlords? Well the closest thing we have to them in the contemporary USA are the members of the right-wing Christian nationalist white supremacist groups. For christ's sake, Trump attempted a coup and the conservatives in this country still support him. I've said before that I don't fear a government dictatorship as much as I fear demagogues who inspire their followers to terrorize local communities as was done following Reconstruction.

Quote:

The Declaration of Independence points out that it is the right and duty of citizens to throw out bad governments.

The Declaration of Independence was written by people trying to overthrow a government so of course they'd say something like that. But it doesn't say anything about an armed insurrection.

Jim Crow laws dictatorially imposed repressive laws on African-Americans but civil rights were extended without black people taking up arms. The armed racists (who are still around) couldn't prevent it from happening. Firearms aren't the answer to unwelcome political change. Mass popular movements are more effective.

3 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Also, if you decide to rebel, the US military will absolutely crush you and your assault weapon without so much as batting an eye.

It's much better for you to seek non-violent, political means.

2 Replies

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

Also, if you decide to rebel, the US military will absolutely crush you and your assault weapon without so much as batting an eye.

It's much better for you to seek non-violent, political means.

Please keep in mind that ...

Quote:

Nearly 7 in 10 Republicans surveyed agree to at least some extent that demographic changes in the United States are deliberately driven by liberal and progressive politicians attempting to gain political power by “replacing more conservative white voters.” Across the political spectrum, we found substantial support for threatening or acting violently against perceived political opponents.

source

It's not the federal government turning dictatorship that keeps Republicans armed. It's the Great Replacement conspiracy theory and the White Supremecist goal to start a race war.

0 Replies

I just listened to a very interesting edition of WBUR's On Point about the "NRA creed", the whole defense against tyranny line. It's bogus. It was coined by the murderer Harlon Carter when he took over the NRA in 1977. It has no historical basis. There are many countries where people enjoy the same freedoms as we do – and probably more – where there is no automatic universal right to own firearms. This creed is sort of the bottom line for these people – doesn't matter how many innocent people are killed, "it's the price we pay for freedom".

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

Assault weapons are not necessary for home defense, and, because of the high powered rounds that they deliver, are detrimental fro that purpose. A home defender is just as likely to shoot a bystander in the next room or next house with his assault weapon. A shotgun is a much better weapon for home defense than an assault weapon.

That's your objection? The gun owner will mysteriously shoot the wrong person? Nonsense. An assault weapon can be fired more rapidly which might be important if one home owner were up against multiple invaders. Anyway, I've given two examples of situations where an assault weapon could be useful to a citizen.

1 Reply

@hightor,

hightor wrote:

Quote:
...if 4 armed people invade your home, you'll do much better with a semi-automatic rifle than with a hand gun or no gun.

Do you really live in a place where you're in fear of gangs of armed men invading your home? Do you wear a flak-jacket n your home, just in case? As InfraBlue pointed out, assault weapons aren't really suitable weapons for "home defense" or much else.. If you're really that frightened and owning an assault-styled weapon helps you to sleep at night, okay, but the weapon should never leave your home.

No, I'm not. I think it's immensely improbable, but it does happen and I've even read about people who survived home invasions only because they had a gun. Having a gun for home defense is perfectly reasonable, and having a gun which could handle multiple people entering one's house is also reasonable.

1 Reply

@hightor,

hightor wrote:

Quote:
Would the citizens of a dictatorship find it easier to rebel against it if they did have guns or if they'd been disarmed?

You guys are really hooked on this scenario, aren't you — what are you imagining, something like you see in the Central American banana republics or Somalia, with paramilitary groups and warlords? Well the closest thing we have to them in the contemporary USA are the members of the right-wing Christian nationalist white supremacist groups. For christ's sake, Trump attempted a coup and the conservatives in this country still support him. I've said before that I don't fear a government dictatorship as much as I fear demagogues who inspire their followers to terrorize local communities as was done following Reconstruction.

Quote:
The Declaration of Independence points out that it is the right and duty of citizens to throw out bad governments.

The Declaration of Independence was written by people trying to overthrow a government so of course they'd say something like that. But it doesn't say anything about an armed insurrection.

Jim Crow laws dictatorially imposed repressive laws on African-Americans but civil rights were extended without black people taking up arms. The armed racists (who are still around) couldn't prevent it from happening. Firearms aren't the answer to unwelcome political change. Mass popular movements are more effective.

To say that a good government can never become dictatorial and citizens don't even have to have insurance against the possibility is naive. It's a valid justification for gun ownership. By the way, your immense respect for the founding idea that citizens have the right to abolish bad governments is noted.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

Also, if you decide to rebel, the US military will absolutely crush you and your assault weapon without so much as batting an eye.

It's much better for you to seek non-violent, political means.

If the power imbalance between the government and the governed is so severe, then it's a very, very bad thing and we certainly don't want to make it worse by denying the governed effective weapons.

2 Replies

@Brandon9000,

A defensive weapon which never leaves one's house is very low on my list of concerns.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Quote:

To say that a good government can never become dictatorial and citizens don't even have to have insurance against the possibility is naive.

That's a hypothetical situation, one for which, were it to play out in reality, we'd have plenty of warning. But right now, it's armed citizens who represent the biggest threat – vigilantes, paramilitary wannabes, and organized white nationalist groups. Firearms afford them power and what they think is "respect". Assault-style weapons embolden them.

Quote:

It's a valid justification for gun ownership.

Yeah, in the first few years of our independence within a well regulated militia.

Quote:

By the way, your immense respect for the founding idea that citizens have the right to abolish bad governments is noted.

Arguing for gun rights by appealing to the Declaration and the Constitution is the sort of circular reasoning used by religious believers who base their arguments on the bible. "The bible sez..."

(btw, Brandon9000, I appreciate you stopping by and making your case even though you're often outnumbered.)

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Well let,s look at the data. We've had close to one mass murder, store shootups, school shoot u[ps, workplace sahootups, picnic shootings a day this year. How many times have we needed to oust a bad governent with our guns this year, Uh, none.. How about last year? Same thing, close tok 20K innocents killed with guns, mostly sem-autos. How many times guns were needed to avert bad government. Uh, none. Same thing the year before that. and the year before that, AND THE YEAR BEFORE THAT. Notice a pattern here? High-velocity AR15 bullets terar up young bodiesso badly they have to be identified by the clothes theyl wore, or by DNA compaison with parents whose kid never came home. That's the simple reality of living with the NRA. Or dying from it. Most people with a shred of morality find that rtradeoff unacceptable.

0 Replies

The whole argument is a crock of ****.

The only threat to American Democracy hasn't come from the governmebt but from 2nd ammendment nutjobs storming the capitol building.

The way to defeat a government is by theballot box, and any attack on b9ting integrity is an attack on democracy and freedom.

When democratic governments are toppled it tends to be by the military in a coup. And it doesn't happen in mature demo racues eithef, of which the US is one.

Let's just imagine that was the case, a bunch of generals are able to get the US Army to fight its own government, ridiculous as that may sound.

The US Army is one of the most sophisticated and powerful in the world, what snowball in hell's chance do a bunch of sad sack NRA muppets have against that.

Wanting a gun has **** all to do with tyrranical government or home protection it's about swanning around feeling big and pretending you have a backbone.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

That's your objection? The gun owner will mysteriously shoot the wrong person? Nonsense. An assault weapon can be fired more rapidly which might be important if one home owner were up against multiple invaders. Anyway, I've given two examples of situations where an assault weapon could be useful to a citizen.

There would be no mystery in the gun owner shooting the wrong person. Assault weapons suck for home defense, and their specious worth thereof does not negate their detriment to the general welfare of the country.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

InfraBlue wrote:
Also, if you decide to rebel, the US military will absolutely crush you and your assault weapon without so much as batting an eye.

It's much better for you to seek non-violent, political means.

If the power imbalance between the government and the governed is so severe, then it's a very, very bad thing and we certainly don't want to make it worse by denying the governed effective weapons.

Your assault weapon is not an effective weapon against the US military.

0 Replies

Another Devastating School Shooting: Uvalde, Texas

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know