Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Zeld2.0 · 08-08-2003, 03:02 PM

Well the argument against tyranny isn't exactly the best one IMO.

Hitler was defenitely elected to his position (Chancellor) but the fact of hte matter is, Germany had many guns around, but they wouldn't dare take it up against him.

And he became a tyrant by matters where guns don't matter at all - he (probably) had the Reichstag (akin to the Capitol) building burned and blamed it on the communists - therefore his party soon had nearly sole control of the Parliament and was thus able to give him at first emergency dictatorial powers for a year to which he extended later to lifetime - and the rest i guess is history.

And I will say this - how many here would actually take their gun up against the government if they chose tyranny. If anyone is likely to get into such a position to gain dictatorial power in this country - i *hate* to stereotype but the person most likely will have support of the gunholders of this country and will probably not be a target because he will have gained popular support.

This is somewhat an ill omen to say for the country but I would suggest people take a look at it all - will you really take up your guns against a dictator? Unless the guy took it completely by force that was very obvious, most likely they got to power by playing on fear and hysteria and most people would willingly follow to the doom.

not to mention that if you took up your guns - would you win? The guy would most likely be commander in chief of the entire military (as the president is) and thus he has access to the military to crush whatever reseistance.

Everyone here that wants to support the military and boost their technology greatly must realize that when the civilian and military gets more separated in terms of weaponary and technology, the military will have even greater power over the citizens and thus making guns at home irrelevant.

It sounds stupid sometimes but think about it - if hte military had super railguns and energy weapons and the civilians have tons of guns (lets say zero gun control) - the civilians are unlikely to win considering the military will have much superior firepower and technology.

We don't even know what the gov't has working secretly on - for al lwe know they do have those weapons but are secret.

Just a thought, nothing big, but interesting to note..

08-08-2003, 03:02 PM	#33 (permalink)
Zeld2.0 Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate Location: Los Angeles	Well the argument against tyranny isn't exactly the best one IMO. Hitler was defenitely elected to his position (Chancellor) but the fact of hte matter is, Germany had many guns around, but they wouldn't dare take it up against him. And he became a tyrant by matters where guns don't matter at all - he (probably) had the Reichstag (akin to the Capitol) building burned and blamed it on the communists - therefore his party soon had nearly sole control of the Parliament and was thus able to give him at first emergency dictatorial powers for a year to which he extended later to lifetime - and the rest i guess is history. And I will say this - how many here would actually take their gun up against the government if they chose tyranny. If anyone is likely to get into such a position to gain dictatorial power in this country - i hate to stereotype but the person most likely will have support of the gunholders of this country and will probably not be a target because he will have gained popular support. This is somewhat an ill omen to say for the country but I would suggest people take a look at it all - will you really take up your guns against a dictator? Unless the guy took it completely by force that was very obvious, most likely they got to power by playing on fear and hysteria and most people would willingly follow to the doom. not to mention that if you took up your guns - would you win? The guy would most likely be commander in chief of the entire military (as the president is) and thus he has access to the military to crush whatever reseistance. Everyone here that wants to support the military and boost their technology greatly must realize that when the civilian and military gets more separated in terms of weaponary and technology, the military will have even greater power over the citizens and thus making guns at home irrelevant. It sounds stupid sometimes but think about it - if hte military had super railguns and energy weapons and the civilians have tons of guns (lets say zero gun control) - the civilians are unlikely to win considering the military will have much superior firepower and technology. We don't even know what the gov't has working secretly on - for al lwe know they do have those weapons but are secret. Just a thought, nothing big, but interesting to note..