Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
So if the argument is there're necessary to repel a tyrannical government who is armed to the teeth with combat issue rifles what was the point again?  |
You're making the point of why the Founders wanted the people to have weapons that would enable them to resist any government which attempted to do away with their natural and unalienable rights, and which would destroy the Constitution which protected those rights.
The ability to resist and overcome a tyrannical government originally created by the people and their representatives has been chipped away at to the point that it seems hilarious to you to even refer to it. But it is still there. It is still, despite your snarky, evil, laughter, still there. Even though the Second Amendment has been severely harmed and limited, it is still there . . . and is still a thorn in the side of those who want to create peace, harmony, equality, and freedom from hunger and want for all of us and for the whole world.
.
And the chipping away has not been just at the Second Amendment, but, necessesarily against the Constitution as a whole, and at the character of the American people by dividing them and bribing them into submission with entitlements and wealth transfers and by changing our demographic makeup by importing a massive influx of dependents from socialist type cultures who reproduce at much higher rates. And by creating a Progressively larger centralized government with a regulatory stranglehold on the economic sector.
The process has been incremental, and it still would be very difficult for the federal government to suddenly proclaim by legislative or judicial fiat that the Constitution was suspended and all power would rest in the elected Central government administered by its appointed regulatory agencies. There are enough people, even in the military, that would resist such a move. The process of change by judicial fiat legislation from the bench, supported by propaganda must still continue until the process is peacefully accomplished.
So it is not so ludicrous to believe, even at this time, that an armed public and a divided military would be able to resist and overcome a tyrannical government.
And Progressives know this, so will continue to finish, by political process, changing us into their ideal of a thoroughly administered system of government run by their idea of experts who know better what is best for the people of this country and of the world.
Voting, and some socialistic notion of "Democracy," might still exist, but the choices will be limited to those who rise up in the political ranks of whatever and whoever are considered the experts. Or the mere formality of voting for those who are basically already in power and between whom there is little difference in regulatory "policy" could legislatively and/or judicially, or by regulation, just be eliminated.
Hey, It might well be the best system for "our time." We evolve. Humans will be different from what they used to be. Or not.