to all the people who argue we need guns to protect againsta tyrannical govt.
Don’t the arguments that crazy nutjob killers don’t need guns to kill, and they would kill with other forms of mass death (ricin, fertilizer explosives) equally apply to citizens rising up against the govt?
that is, wont rebelling citizens be just as effective at slaughtering the govt tyrannists with various non-gun weaponry?
if guns didn’t exist, gun enthusiast seem to beli,eve that we won’t be any safer, as killers will turn to equally effective means…and if that were true, then taking away guns shouldn’t affect the ability of the citizenry to revolt.
right?
or are guns absoltuely necessary for the people to overthrow the govt.
the armed masses revolting against the govt frankly sounds kind of unlikely to me.[/quote]
I only have two recent examples to prove you wrong – Egypt and Syria…
If they did not have hand weapons at all, they would not have any chance. A semi-automatic weapon with numbers is good odds. The underdog with inferior weapons and numbers seem to win.
Regardless of the army, it will be always more deadly to fight someone in their own town.
“Sacks of potassium nitrate and sugar lie nearby. In a neat row against the wall is the finished product, homemade mortars.”
“We’re volunteers, we were workers, we were never soldiers. They’re locally made.”
“We aren’t able to get any weapons from abroad. We have nothing except for the rifle to fight with,” said another man at the workshop.
Our forefathers correctly understood then and now, that personal (fire)arms in the hands of the people will always be the best defense of tyranny. What do you think would happen if you take their firearms away? Will they have more life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness or less?
