Replies

Incidentally, in order to properly maintain their sovereignty, should the People through militias be able to have tanks and aircraft? Surface to Air Missiles? Grenades? Because in order to properly challenge governmental authority they would need it.

Should we allow arms to be used in political assassination? What else would the right to bear arms be good for, if their purpose is to keep the power over the state?

Incidentally, in order to properly maintain their sovereignty, should the People through militias be able to have tanks and aircraft? Surface to Air Missiles? Grenades? Because in order to properly challenge governmental authority they would need it.

My liberal friend, please visit THIS LINK for a refutation of your strawman argument.

Incidentally, in order to properly maintain their sovereignty, should the People through militias be able to have tanks and aircraft? Surface to Air Missiles? Grenades? Because in order to properly challenge governmental authority they would need it.

Yes they should and yes they did have the equivalents before 1934.

Cyclopean Squid: Incidentally, in order to properly maintain their sovereignty, should the People through militias be able to have tanks and aircraft? Surface to Air Missiles? Grenades? Because in order to properly challenge governmental authority they would need it. Those are not really necessary to fight an occupying power. Small arms do ok it seems.

"Incidentally, in order to properly maintain their sovereignty, should the People through militias be able to have tanks and aircraft? Surface to Air Missiles? Grenades? Because in order to properly challenge governmental authority they would need it."

I'm a Class III owner. Maybe you should check out what is legal to own before asking silly questions. Then do a search on how many Class III weapons have ever been used in a violent act of crime since the Dept of Treasury has been keeping records on us for over half a century.

"Should we allow arms to be used in political assassination?"

Clarify your question. "Political assassination" of elected officials in this country would be a big "No-No". However... political assassinations of threats to our nation from outside our boarders could have prevented some needless death and destruction, but Clinton couldn't pull the trigger on OBL so we got 9-11.

" What else would the right to bear arms be good for, if their purpose is to keep the power over the state?"

You really need to look up some quotes from our founding fathers regarding the RKBA.