Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwatt
Um, the gov't has pretty much no chance vs 80 million gun owners in the USA.
What percentage of the police/National Guard/military would tell Obama to pound sand if he ordered them to go door to door confiscating weapons from their neighbors?
Jesus, 8 tours in Afghanistan sounds safer than kicking down doors in Mississippi.
Nice strawman. Nobody here is arguing we should have nukes. We are arguing taking away guns from law abiding citizens wont preven't tragedies like what just happened.
People are more evil today than ever before. Start lobbying for more asylums to house the crazies if you want a solution.
I thought it would be assumed that I didn't mean a full scale war of the gov. vs. its citizens. But if it did come to that the citizens would lose anyway but that's basically an impossible scenario.
We can't really force our government to do anything right now or keep them from doing anything. They could start hauling us away to camps what would we do? Take our relative pea shooters out in suicidal last stands?
Let's assume for a second, without making any real judgement, that Bush did steal the election and it was plain to everyone but the right wing was cool with it. Could we who thought is wasn't cool have launched a revolt with our guns against their Apache helicopters and Abrams tanks and who knows what else? No.
My nukes argument is not a strawman tactic. I am not saying you say we should have personal nukes. I am saying that clearly you do not agree we should have nukes so then you clearly agree to restrictions since no nukes is a restriction. If we have restrictions then we are drawing the line somewhere. Why not draw it at the point that maximizes our safety? So you can hunt coons? I don't give a care about your raccoon hunting. Get a bow and arrow and give the animals a chance tough guy.