I just don't see how crazy folks being able to legally bear damn-near military grade weapons is necessary to the security of a free state. Folks need to admit to themselves that we are not living in a time when the security of this country is dependent on an armed civilian population. Self protection is the only reason I own guns because as long as we have the National Guard and the most powerful military in the history of the world, the security of the free state is not threatened. Now, if you are talking about taking up arms against the USA, you will need more than an AR for the reasons stated in the previous sentence.
No, what really bothers small-minded, bigoted Progs is seeing a few Korean shop-keepers able to defend themselves and their livelihoods from large, violent mobs even when the police abandon the law abiding citizens. Nothing upsets Progs more than seeing citizens getting by without government programs, except maybe to see members of minorities demonstrating such glorious independence.
Of course, many Progs own guns for their own protection (or live in gated communities with armed guards) even as they are very much opposed to others--and especially hated conservatives or those poor inferior minorities who need special set asides to compete in society--owning guns for their protection. Again, heaven forbid that the lower socio-economic classes not be wholly dependent on the graces of government officials for the protection of life, limb, and essential property. My goodness, some of those poor creatures might actually vote for candidates not in the Democrat Party.
As for the most powerful military in the history of the world, how is it then that a bunch of third world jungle rats managed to run us out of Vietnam? How is that neither the Soviets nor the US can seem to manage to actually conquer the people of Afghanistan? Why is it that the "JV team" (as Barrack Hussein Obama called them) of ISIS can manage to inflict so much damage against a nation with this military might?
Are you ignorant of the concept of "asymmetric warfare"? Or just being deceitful (again, and again, and again) by pretending it doesn't exist?
Small arms may not allow a population to conquer a modern military power. But they can most certainly provide the ability to keep that power from completely conquering the population.
More importantly, the "security of a free state" involves more than just foreign powers or keeping the government in check. Riots, rebellions, and other internal disturbances can leave the citizenry in grave danger unless they are able to protect themselves until order can be restored.
Besides, since an AR is powerless against an modern military, respecting my right to own them doesn't threaten your safety at all, using your "logic."
Don't like ARs? Don't buy one. But my
individual right to own firearms is settled law as you Progs like to say about any SCOTUS ruling you agree with.
I'll not accept any more restrictions on my enumerated right to own firearms than you will accept on the court invented "right" to murder innocent, unborn babies, or to publish the most disgusting porn your sick minds can dream up.
Charles
