Comment: You don't put it beyond the government...

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Oh god (see in situ)

You don't put it beyond the government...

to use drones to murder us domestically, but you think there is no need to protect ourselves from government tyranny?

The Patriot Act is similar in ways of enforcement to the British Stamp Act.

The NDAA 2012 (reauthorized in NDAA 2013) allows for indefinite detention of American citizens without due process of law.

Now, they are using the excuse of a mass shooting to ban certain guns.

I see a pattern here. Go back to sleep. Your government has everything under control. You can forfeit your right to bear arms, but you cannot forfeit mine. The US is a constitutional republic, not a pure democracy. Our form of government is suppose to protect against the tyranny of a majority.

To be honest about fully automatic weapons, I would rather conserve ammo by using a semi-auto. So, I am not against people having fully automatic weapons.

To go even further - to your proposed extreme - would the government mess with me if I had a nuke ready to go with the push of a button pointed at DC? However, while assured mutual destruction is a good deterrent against violence, I would not condone individuals owning nuclear weapons. Admittedly though, nuclear weapons kept the Cold War cold.

Being aware that you have a capable adversary is always a good way to prevent violence. On the other hand, some being aware that they have a less than capable adversary makes violence more likely.

If you like gun bans so much and have bought into the demagoguery of "keeping the kids safe," then go move to Chicago. I here the gun bans there are really stopping violence; they had a record number of gun murders this year.

You seem to be blaming the existence of certain guns and accessories for the cause of these mass shootings while you seem to completely ignore that nearly all of these shootings have involved a shooter on Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs). For instance, I have heard the statistic that people taking Prozac - an SSRI - are 12 times more likely to commit a violent act against themselves or others when compared to people taking different anti-depressants.

Unfortunate for the truth, big pharma is a big part of the Huxlian agenda governments seem to be pursing - keeping people happy with their mundane lives by shoving pills down their throats. Oh, and one can't ignore the amount of money involved in big pharma with the heavy government involvement in "healthcare."

Like I said earlier - Go back to sleep. Your government has everything under control.

BTW, I am aware of what the 2nd Amendment says -

"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." (Emphasis mine)

Interestingly, it doesn't say - "the right of the Militia Men to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Instead it says - "the People."

I would translate the 2nd Amendment as - So that a Militia may be raised with haste in the event it is needed, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

For a historical context, one can look to Jefferson -

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."


"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."

Looks like they're trying to take it.

One more thing, Ronald Reagan was not a small government conservative/libertarian.