Now I understand that it's not feasible to put a Sherman tank and every driveway. That being said, I feel like to keep tyranny in check there has to be the threat of mutually assured destruction. Which may sound intense but it's what our founders were willing to risk in 1776
4
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
7 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.
All this civil war talk is a bit over the top... so my initial thought is to dismiss it as humor, but it doesn’t really feel that way. Feels more like alarmism masked in humor.
Just curious. Who is going to be fighting whom?
TotalSquare
Level 4
Mar 8, 2019
0
And I'm deadass... Well considering local governments are sending police officers to confiscate legal weapons from law abiding citizens, it's going to be more of a revolution than a civil war, that's why I referred to 1776 i.e. revolution. Not 1861, I.e. civil war
@Rus-T-Balls and you think this will be a widespread phenomenon... also, at least 2 people in the comments said “civil war”
@TotalSquare is it imminent insofar as within my lifetime probably not, within my children's lifetime without corrective action probably, and in my grandkids lifetime certainly if we continue to give huge away freedoms for a false sense of security. Benjamin Franklin said those who are willing to give up freedom for security deserve neither and I fully and wholeheartedly believe that
@TotalSquare they can name it whatever they want Patriot act freedom act whatever the hell but they are setting the groundwork for the stripping down of our liberties. Next they will start to slowly take the guns, enact martial law, and because good people stayed silent, this is how our republic will crumble
[fff.org]
@Rus-T-Balls who knows what the world will even look like then... or how technology will change firearms... but sure, your point is valid. But the people saying they are prepping for civil war... against whom?
@Rus-T-Balls who is “they”?
@TotalSquare idk ask the ones who said it, not the guy who didn't, I can't answer for their opinion, so...........
@Rus-T-Balls I was...
@TotalSquare they could be Sasquatch they could be hidden race of robot aliens they could be the lizard people Alex Jones talks about they could be the Illuminati they could be mutant ant creatures they could be whatever the hell crazy people want it to be I don't worry about that
You can take everything away from man and he will still defend him self with his body against Injustice. We should not mess with the second amendment it was to ensure we had the same power as our elected leaders
Minuteman5874
Level 4
Mar 8, 2019
1
Individuals have always been subject to the will of the king, dictator, state, governing body for as long as we know. Our Constitution is unique in that in spells out what the government cannot do to individuals. However, even our Constitution has limits in the face of an aggressive majority that seeks to impose its will. Our ultimate defense is our court system which provides some buffer against the tyranny of the government or the majority. That's why having as many "originalists" as possible at all levels of the judiciary is critical. Without such protection, the only alternative is civil war which is a lose-lose proposition.
DanTige
Level 4
Mar 8, 2019
1
I think we're there right now. If a power structure in DC openly flaunts tyranny against the people (no free elections with a gun grab) they would have a difficult time if even 30% of the country decided to reimpose freedom. A lot of death on both sides with only an outside chance of reestablishing freedom so yeah MAD.
RobBlair
Level 8
Mar 8, 2019
0
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.