Comment: The thing with nuclear...

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I missed this post (see in situ)

The thing with nuclear...

... weapons and other WMDs is that they really aren't usable in defense against tyranny without inflicting mass casualties, which takes away the rights of Life and Liberty of innocents in the process. (Honestly, I believe that governments should not even have nuclear weapons and that they are immoral to use; but that genie is out of the bottle, and unfortunately they seem to be a necessary deterrent at this point.)

When it comes to military-style 'assault' rifles, that is a different story altogether. Those weapons could indeed be used effectively in a resistance against tyranny, in a targeted fashion, similar to the asymmetric warfare the colonists had to engage in against the redcoats. They do not carry with them the automatic death sentence for innocents that something like a nuke would involve. The effort to ban these types of small arms or to limit their magazine sizes is an assault on the capability of the citizens to--God forbid--have to defend themselves like their forebears did.

By the way, I am open to hearing where Farrakhan's views intersect with Liberty, despite my misgivings.