At every turn, the protaganist needed arms to have an chance at justice and defending his group against tyranny. The only thing keeping their freedom (to vote) was they were openly and heavily armed.
shareAmen! That is so true!
shareYou think that Free State of Jones shows that the second Amendment helped the blacks in the deep south after 1865? You must have been watching a different version to the one I saw.
Certainly a different version of history. It was not by using their guns that black people were able to get access the ballot, or to the front seats on buses, or to decent rooms in hotels, or places in good schools.
What good was the second amendment against Jim Crow laws, or the Ku Klux Klan? If you are being oppressed then you will find that those who oppress you will have a lot more guns than you, and the second amendment makes this more likely rather than less.
Maybe we saw two different versions.
SPOILERS
What allowed them to vote after they got denied, and suddenly the republican ballots just happened to be found?
What turned the tax collectors away from unlawfully pillaging the farm with the little girls?
Just two examples, there were many.
Did you notice how many republican votes was counted vs. How many where left in the jar?
No, Guns didn't help them at all.
I don't see how this relates to today's society unless you believe that we need the 2nd amendment in order to assassinate presidents, murder government officials and kill police officers. Whenever this occurs, I'm sure the shooter firmly believes they're dishing out justice. Don't do anything crazy, pardi-505-125733.
shareMaybe back then, but that philosophy is kind of outdated today. Do you really think you and your buddies could stand up to a corrupt government with a couple shotguns and rifles vs tanks and drones and advanced military equipment?
share[deleted]
Great post tyghock. Unbiased and informative.
The Second Amendment was designed so that no tyrannical or invading army had more firepower than the populace, with weapons being roughly on a par and the civilians being far more numerous than any army; it was an insurance policy.
The reason it is no longer (as) relevant is that now it would have to allow every citizen of the USA to own an aircraft carrier and/or some stealthy air force.
To paraphrase Australian comic Jim Jefferies, you are quite literally bringing a gun to a drone fight.
But you could, theoretically (AND I WOULD LOVE TO), set up automated defenses at your farm, powered by an internal source, running on a combination of windmills, solar installations and traditional generators - like such: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgcIOL7yO0E
Export power back into the electricity grid when the guns are not in use (when the government isn't trying to kill you) and try to recuperate some of the $30,000,000 it would cost to own and maintain such a system. :))
They do it every day in Afghanistan.
shareAfghans had rocket-propelled grenades, mortars, surface-to-air missiles, and other weapons when I was there. I assume they still do. I don't want such weapons to be freely available to civilian US citizens. Nor would anyone who is sane.
shareThe older I get, the more I think that the only way to truly be free is for each man to have a bio/chem nuclear shelter and enough firepower to stop a division of tanks, plus a advanced SAM installation in their back yard and autonomous power (and water, from a deep well). IDK., call me paranoid. =)
*Edit*: Oh and all would be welcome at my castle, young and old!
I'm not sure whether to call you paranoid...are you Michael Shannon in Take Shelter???
share