|
Name:
|
copperline
-
|
Subject:
|
How long is the lifespan of a gun?
|
Date:
|
1/21/2013 12:59:47 AM
|
|
i’m
trying to understand how you see it. i
think you mean that an armed populace presents a natural counter-weight against
a potentially authoritarian government, and that when people have the right to
bear arms the government is less likely to turn against them. i guess
i can agree with that. i have always thought that is what the
Constitution meant to say.
Just
how much an armed civilian US population prevents an authoritarian swing in
govt is something i’m not so sure about….. but fundamentally, yes… governments
can and do dominate people throughout history, and the powers of government need
to be kept in check by the rule of law based on Democratic principles of
freedom, self-determination, etc .
But
because we are citizens of the largest, most successful, most politically
stable, most powerful and richest economy in the world, i don’t think the
threats exist in the same way you do. An armed populace may serve to keep the
government in check in theory, but …..how much? And is the historical influence of an armed
population still as much of a deterrent to tyranny now as it was in 1776? i
just don’t think it would be.
i
am just saying that we get more far protections from our right to vote,
assemble, and speak out than from our right to bear arms. … and that this round
of gun control efforts will not compromise any part of the 2nd
Amendment.
|