Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreas
What other purpose do you see in an armed citizenry standing against a tyrannical government? So, yes, I have answered which is more than you have.
The ongoing conversation in this thread, and the post you initially replied to, concern the 2nd Amendment. Your reply was as follows.
"Our revolution was a successful armed insurrection. Responsible citizens have the right to arm themselves as a deterrent to tyrants."
So, it was legitimate to ask you how a rebellious populace was specifically licensed by the 2nd Amendment. So far, you haven't answered and I don't think you can in anything resembling a satisfactory manner.
|
I remind everyone that the bolded statement isn't entirely true. Not under the contextual notion that a bunch of armed colonials successfully rebelled against the British military entirely on their own. Would the revolutionaries have won their revolution without the help of powerful allies? I'm not so sure.
Also; Who is it that determines what constitutes a "responsible citizen"? What is the criteria?
__________________
"When the lie is so big and the fog so thick, the Republican trick can play out again....."-------Frank Zappa
Last edited by BlueStreak; 10-08-2015 at 01:23 AM.
|