The result of several decades from NRA successfully screaming Dems gonna get you guns!

There aren’t enough leftist gun owners, sadly.

At some point people confused peaceful with harmless. Harmless people who got accustomed to the idea of outsourcing the capacity for violence… but then the vendor had a change in ownership…

You’re describing exactly how the tyranny is done

We love us some guns

The 2A crowd brought us fascism by voting for literally anyone who told them they could keep their AR’s. Now we have fascism-lite with our government disappearing people unlawfully with plain-clothed goon squads, and the 2A crowd is on the side of the fascists. In other words, they were the ones screaming about the importance of the people being able to protect themselves from the government, for decades, and now that we’re in a situation were people actually need to do that, they’re on the sidelines cheering on the authoritarian government. A lot of people like me aren’t surprised at all.

I await with interest your explanation as to how and why private gun ownership “caused and supported” the current unlawful government

Dollars to Donuts half those badgeless, masked vigilantes kidnapping people from immigration courts are members of the NRA.

Furthermore, gun laws are deliberately structured such that the police and various government forces throughout the country enjoy considerably less restriction (or even none) on the type, number, and nature of guns that they’re allowed to own and use.

Mulford Act, etc. Sure. The disarming of the public is always at the expense of the working class progressive. It never seems to come for the right-wing reactionaries, the domestic terrorists, or the conservative-aligned militia movements.

But that’s where things get sticky, because “Gun Rights” has become synonymous with “Fascist Politics” as a result. Guns are regularly touted as the tools to overthrow liberal politicians. And as a result liberal politicians champion gun control out of a sense of self-preservation. Meanwhile conservative politicians champion more money spent on the security state, because it allows them to arm and organize far-right police, private security, and paramilitary groups.

What becomes extra frustrating is when liberal politicians give conservative paramilitary groups the weapons and funds they need to organize, on the grounds that these conservative paramilitaries will protect the liberals from the Lone Wolf / Rogue Agent. Rather than guarding them, these police agencies effectively take the liberal political class hostage.

Yours are the words of an armchair porkbelly who has absolutely no idea whatsoever how militaries or revolutions or even guns themselves work.

Get in the cattle car.

Bro look at Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan,

Better toys for your soldiers doesn’t mean you automatically win the war.

That’s when you use the smaller weapons to storm lightly defended military bases and seize the really big guns.

I think you’re wrong.

quarter millennium

Gerrymandering. Registration purges. Compromised voting machines. Voter suppression and intimidation. Banning mail-in voting. Closing, relocating, and reducing polling sites.

Insert meme: “Is this voting rights?”

Not a bad viewpoint. But I give less credit to voting rights than I do to social media in our downfall.

Look at somewhere like Syria. Governments still get taken down by armed revolutionaries. Yes, there is the issue that governments are better armed. But there are a few fatal flaws in the idea that this makes them invincible:

1. A lot of expensive weapons systems like airplanes and tanks can be taken out by much cheaper and accessible systems like MANPADS and drones.

2. There will be people on the side of the rebels with previous military experience that will know how to use the heavier weapons.

3. Groups of revolutionaries armed with civilian-accessible weapons can find lightly defended military bases, storm them, and seize heavier weapons.

4. Rebel groups always receive outside assistance from foreign powers.

If a group of revolutionaries deposes the California state government, declares the New California Republic, and tries to secede from the US, they won’t be fighting with AR-15s for long. They’ll be using the strongest available civilian weapons to raid National Guard armories and other locations that may not be so heavily defended. They may even do so with the tacit support of those working at those facilities. Then their goal will be to hold out long enough against the US government that they can petition foreign powers like China to support their rebellion against the US federal government.

Revolts don’t happen in a vacuum. Rebels don’t need to hold out against the central government indefinitely armed only with light weaponry. At the end of the day, there’s going to be some other well armed country out there that’s going to be more than happy to see their geopolitical rival be embroiled in a war of secession. If California decided to rebel on Monday, by Friday the PRC would be loading every drone, antitank missile, and MANPAD they can find into crates, ready to smuggle them in container ships past the US Navy. Even if China didn’t support the aims of the California rebels, it wouldn’t matter. Hell, they wouldn’t even care about the final outcome of the war. They would happily fund heavy weapons to the rebels just to make sure the US federal government was too embroiled in a crisis at home to devote many resources to places like Taiwan.

The government still needs people to enforce their laws, you can’t use fighter jets, bioweapons, and nuclear weapons against your own citizenry without losing legitimacy and leading to a civil war where foreign governments would arm all sides. Take a look at Syria, they successfully overthrew the Assad regime with the support of other nations.

We currently have armed unidentified state thugs snatching random minorities off the streets, that’s the sort of government abuse that could be stopped if liberals were armed. The state can only go so far in using force against their own citizens before it fractures and we look like the Syrian civil war.

even much simpler than that… being more than just one guy.

Because the military would fracture during a civil war.

The Vietnamese and Afghans could probably tell us a thing or two.

One aspect I don’t think many appreciate is the deterrent effect of private gun ownership. The fascists would have already overrun us were we not armed. Notice the major ICE raids have been in NYC and California? Those are the two places in America with the strictest, and often dumbest, gun laws. Anecdotally, being visibly armed likely saved me two ass beatings in the past year. LOL, one guy was so fucking mad he was shaking, choking himself to be polite.

Most of our military might can’t be brought to bear on civilians. The examples you gave are purpose built to fight another military on their turf. The Air Force isn’t going to deploy fighter jets to put down a riot. And NONE of those things will continue working about a week after civilians pull support.

You see, if the government bombs it’s cities flat, it no longer has anything to govern, and falls anyways.

What we need are armed protests. Something you can’t just easily police thug your way out of. We can all go protest and wave signs all we want, but until those in power are once again afraid of it’s people, nothing will change.

One aspect of the U.S. Second Amendment that I struggle to understand is how owning firearms can be seen as a check against government power in the modern era. No matter how much money an individual spends on collecting weapons, they can never match the resources of a government with access to advanced technology like orbital GPS networks, fighter jets, drones, bioweapons, logistics, and nuclear weapons.

No shit they’ll just burn your place to the ground Tulsa style. USA is quickly becoming North Korea.

So what your saying is we need to give people more weapons to even up the fight.