|
Tilted Cat Head
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
But it is outdated. Free elections, checks and balances, free press, free speech; these are necessary for a free state. Guns, once, would have made a great tool for insurrection against an oppressive government, but no longer. While I'm sure your proficiency with a gun would make you a bane to any criminal breaking into your home, you can't possibly think that you can stand up to state or federal military or police forces. Even if you had a respectable fighting force, the insurrection would devolve into terrorism (hardly well regulated) as soon as you realized that you can't take on the US military head on. As guns no longer are the key to revolution and maintaining a free state, the amendment no longer finds itself relevant. It's been reduced to either a cover for gun culture or for self-defense. You'll notice self-defense isn't named in the amendment as the reason guns are a right. If it were, I'd be formulating a completely different argument.
|
So doing away with the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 seemed like a great idea and the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 seemed like such a great idea. So long as all the money was rolling in, what was the point of such safeguards as the Glass-Steagall Act?????? I do not think we'd be in such dire straights if the bill was left intact.
You can't predict that guns won't be a useful element to revolution in the future just because some countries had peaceful revolutions in the recent past.
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.
|