Total Posts:6|Showing Posts:1-6
Jump to topic:

Tyranny and Guns

Your_Conscience
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 1:11:20 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
There are many who say that the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution was put into effect as a countermeasure against a tyrannical government. This makes sense, considering the context surrounding the founding of the Constitution the US had just broken away from Great Britain over matters of government overreach. Many others contest this countermeasure, stating that a tyrannical government in the US is impossible in this day and age, and that the 2nd Amendment is outdated.

For the sake of my question, let's assume a tyrannical government in the US is possible. What sort of tyrannical governments can manifest in the US, a representative democracy, and would an armed populace be able to combat that sort of tyranny?
Emmarie
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 2:37:03 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/28/2016 1:11:20 AM, Your_Conscience wrote:
There are many who say that the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution was put into effect as a countermeasure against a tyrannical government. This makes sense, considering the context surrounding the founding of the Constitution the US had just broken away from Great Britain over matters of government overreach. Many others contest this countermeasure, stating that a tyrannical government in the US is impossible in this day and age, and that the 2nd Amendment is outdated.

For the sake of my question, let's assume a tyrannical government in the US is possible. What sort of tyrannical governments can manifest in the US, a representative democracy, and would an armed populace be able to combat that sort of tyranny?
An armed populace could probably not combat a tyrannical government - but the fact that so many Americans are armed most definitely deters the government from becoming openly tyrannical. Instead they use the media and marketing to get us to conform to their wishes thru subliminal means.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 2:57:47 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/28/2016 1:11:20 AM, Your_Conscience wrote:
There are many who say that the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution was put into effect as a countermeasure against a tyrannical government. This makes sense, considering the context surrounding the founding of the Constitution the US had just broken away from Great Britain over matters of government overreach. Many others contest this countermeasure, stating that a tyrannical government in the US is impossible in this day and age, and that the 2nd Amendment is outdated.

For the sake of my question, let's assume a tyrannical government in the US is possible. What sort of tyrannical governments can manifest in the US, a representative democracy, and would an armed populace be able to combat that sort of tyranny?

With the current military, I think that millions of Americans would die, but ultimately the gun-owners would win (It would be a bastille style situation, I think).
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
capob
Posts: 73
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 3:39:31 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/28/2016 1:11:20 AM, Your_Conscience wrote:
There are many who say that the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution was put into effect as a countermeasure against a tyrannical government. This makes sense, considering the context surrounding the founding of the Constitution the US had just broken away from Great Britain over matters of government overreach. Many others contest this countermeasure, stating that a tyrannical government in the US is impossible in this day and age, and that the 2nd Amendment is outdated.

For the sake of my question, let's assume a tyrannical government in the US is possible. What sort of tyrannical governments can manifest in the US, a representative democracy, and would an armed populace be able to combat that sort of tyranny?

I understand this is probably a school assignment, and that's why you worded as you did, but it is not an opinion that the 2nd amendment is in place to avoid a tyrannical government. All but an idiot (which, unfortunately, classifies many, many americans) can understand this from the text of the amendment alone.

" A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

"a free State" as in, not a tyranny. And, what secures a free State? That which secures a free State prevents it from becoming a tyranny.
Not only did they say it was for avoidance of tyranny, they said it was necessary for such.

Interestingly, what this also makes clear, is that militias were expected to come about naturally out of those who owned arms.

As for what arms should be allowed. Well, technically, the US Government nor the states have any right to make any law that infringes on someone's right to buy any arms. This includes nukes, bazookas, miniguns, mechanical-booted legs that kick.

And, for the insane idea of: "what if a crazy man got a bazooka and shot something?". Do you know how much they cost? Cost alone would negate most crazy people from buying big weapons, and if you are afraid that the citizenry is going to be violent, you need better citizenry (ie, stop importing crazy people).
Your_Conscience
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 2:11:24 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/28/2016 2:37:03 AM, Emmarie wrote:
At 7/28/2016 1:11:20 AM, Your_Conscience wrote:
There are many who say that the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution was put into effect as a countermeasure against a tyrannical government. This makes sense, considering the context surrounding the founding of the Constitution the US had just broken away from Great Britain over matters of government overreach. Many others contest this countermeasure, stating that a tyrannical government in the US is impossible in this day and age, and that the 2nd Amendment is outdated.

For the sake of my question, let's assume a tyrannical government in the US is possible. What sort of tyrannical governments can manifest in the US, a representative democracy, and would an armed populace be able to combat that sort of tyranny?
An armed populace could probably not combat a tyrannical government - but the fact that so many Americans are armed most definitely deters the government from becoming openly tyrannical. Instead they use the media and marketing to get us to conform to their wishes thru subliminal means.

So if tyranny can manifest itself in government as an oppressive "media-state", how can the 2nd Amendment prevent that? In broader terms, are there certain types of tyranny that cannot be solved with an armed populace?
Emmarie
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2016 3:44:13 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/28/2016 2:11:24 PM, Your_Conscience wrote:
At 7/28/2016 2:37:03 AM, Emmarie wrote:
At 7/28/2016 1:11:20 AM, Your_Conscience wrote:
There are many who say that the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution was put into effect as a countermeasure against a tyrannical government. This makes sense, considering the context surrounding the founding of the Constitution the US had just broken away from Great Britain over matters of government overreach. Many others contest this countermeasure, stating that a tyrannical government in the US is impossible in this day and age, and that the 2nd Amendment is outdated.

For the sake of my question, let's assume a tyrannical government in the US is possible. What sort of tyrannical governments can manifest in the US, a representative democracy, and would an armed populace be able to combat that sort of tyranny?
An armed populace could probably not combat a tyrannical government - but the fact that so many Americans are armed most definitely deters the government from becoming openly tyrannical. Instead they use the media and marketing to get us to conform to their wishes thru subliminal means.

So if tyranny can manifest itself in government as an oppressive "media-state", how can the 2nd Amendment prevent that?
It can't, what it does prevent is for the government to be able to invade private property, without knowing if the property owner is armed.
In broader terms, are there certain types of tyranny that cannot be solved with an armed populace?
We live in a society where the marketing of ideas support the consumption of goods. I'm not just referring to the advertising of products, I'm talking about the American Dream being misconstrued to mean that the accumulation of stuff, leads to happiness which it doesn't. Anyone who deliberately chooses to make the accumulation of stuff and wealth, less of a priority, while maintaining enough to live without the need for governmental assistance, is socially stigmatized, because of the way ideas about prestige were "marketed" to the mainstream population.

Growth of the economy is another area where the favorable opinion of the concept, has been marketed to the degree that few question why "growth" is necessary to have a healthy economy. Growth ensures that those at the top will continue to increase their wealth. It also ensures that those who are content with making less, will need to seek a way of earning more $$, in order to survive without governmental assistance, so it promotes a competitive atmosphere in labor.

I'm not a socialist, in that I desire the government to redistribute wealth. I do see that the power of people to boycott and resist by simply buying less of using less electricity of natural gas, is met with such resistance; so the forces of marketing are powerful tools that have been used to support the tyranny of the super wealthy. (I support small businesses where the owners live comfortable lifestyles as the fruits of their labor)