11-04-2018, 12:01 AM
(11-03-2018, 09:08 AM)Galen Wrote: I suggest that you read about the history of the Militia Acts of 1792. It gives a very clear picture of exactly what the framers of the Constitution had in mind. It specified that individuals were to have, what were at the time state of the art, small arms. Looking at what the founding fathers had to say it becomes clear that they considered owning firearms to be an individual right. They regarded a large standing army as a threat to liberty.
By the way the Taliban are winning in Afganistan which has little more than infantry small arms. The situation hasn't gotten any better in the last three years. The Soviet Union faced the same problem in the eighties and how did that work out for them?
Governments always disarm target populations before genocide. You are too clueless and short sighted to figure this out. You simply can't believe that your god, known to the rest of us as the state, is capable of such evil but it is.
I do think autocratic governments act quite differently than long term democratic ones, but I agree with you on the Founding Father's well documented perspective and the Taliban's (and other similar autocratic factions) ability to keep proxy wars alive by not winning. Well, George Washington would have understood. Even George III understood eventually.
That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.