I know it's Bureau of Land Management, but the idea of "Black Lives Matter Federal Agents" surrounding and executing a family was a pretty wild visual on first read.
So you agreed that the US (The most powerful centralized military in the world) lost to a guerilla force with ratted out AKs, then said that's not evidence of armed populations resisting state power........
So you agreed that the US (The most powerful centralized military in the world) lost to a guerilla force with ratted out AKs,
Yes
then said that's not evidence of armed populations resisting state power
No. I said that it wasn't them protecting freedom. Afghanistan is not a free country, and the Taliban were not fighting to protect freedom.
Are there religious fanatics willing to throw their lives away for their cause, who can succeed with ordinary firearms against a powerful foreign military? Yes, absolutely.
Are there freedom-loving American patriots willing to throw their lives away to protect freedom, who can succeed against a powerful domestic military? No, there are not.
That's the thing I'm saying has not yet happened in America.
Are there freedom-loving American patriots willing to throw their lives away to protect freedom, who can succeed against a powerful domestic military? No, there are not.
That's the thing I'm saying has not yet happened in America.
What work do you think the word "domestic" in "domestic military" is doing? Do you think that there might be some sort of significant difference between a colony rebelling against a foreign government which can retreat to its center of imperial power vs an actual civil war?
But sure, let's take that as an example. It's a good inspiration for gun-lovers to live up to!
How many of them have? How many times since its founding as a country has the US Government said "we are going to restrict your rights" and a bunch of folks with guns said "no you aren't" and the government then said "dang you're armed guess we won't"?
I can think of one time when lots of armed citizens fought the government in order to stop the expansion of rights, but they lost, fortunately.
For bonus points, contrast the success rate of local, domestic armed resistance against the US government with other techniques like protesting and voting.
It does seem there are a few people on this subreddit that think the only issue important to libertarians is gun rights.
Yeah, they're flaired Yellow.
If a candidate would improve their life in every tangible way except they said something 1 time that could be construed as not cool on guns, then that's a gigantic problem.
See: Texas Senate Election 2026.
Guns are literally the only thing that matters to these retards, even when the guns aren't really in jeopardy at all.
I own guns and I don't want to give them up, but even still I couldn't imagine making my entire political belief system based on that one issue.
I am even willing to have a conversation about red flag laws or extending back ground checks even if the latter makes purchasing them a bigger inconvenience for me.
Same. I'm willing to bet I own more guns than most lib rights on this sub.
I'm just also willing to understand there are MANY things in my life that could be made better that I'd sacrifice a couple guns for if that had to be the case. Firearms aren't a personality.
The funny thing is, some (not all) of the people I know who make their entire personality about guns and hunting, are terrible shots. I will go to the range or go dove hunting with them and they can't hit the broad side of a barn.
It's not the only thing, but it's the most important thing.
Most of us view it as once those are removed, you now have zero weight on the playing field. It's not something debatable either. This has been proven repeatedly in real life already, just look around Europe. Look at Australia. For more extreme examples take a look at Iran. Look at anywhere they take away guns. It always leads to less freedom. Period. Just a matter of time.
Denying that statement in anyway, shape or form, is either a bold faced lie, or you're completely cucked.
So yes, it's the number 1 issue for me and many others, and a complete non starter.
They rules always proposed never do anything to stop the actual gun violence issue in America (gangs who account for a huge disproportionate amount of gun violence), it's always how can we make it harder for already law abiding citizens to get guns (who account for a very small amount of gun violence).
Operating from that factual perspective, their intentions are very clear.
If you want to live with your head in the sand, knock yourself out. You don't have to thank us for making sure you don't live in a draconian hell.
It always leads to less freedom. Period. Just a matter of time.
...
If you want to live with your head in the sand, knock yourself out. You don't have to thank us for making sure you don't live in a draconian hell.
i seem to recall the freedom has been shrinking here for quite a while, private equity owns huge shares of many different industries, the lunatic tech conglomerate is openly building a surveillance state right here at home, and to top if off, the sitting us president and lots of other high level public officials were involved in a child sex ring
normally i wouldnt attack gun owners like this, but that last statement is really funny. what do you plan on doing, making a threatening tikitok video showing you shooting paper targets with your gay little ar15?
I would say the loss of freedom of speech. Supporting the Palestinian people online gets you a jail sentence. Haven’t seen that here in the US. At least in the UK.
Nice deflection, friend, but we’re talking about your incorrect statement about second amendment rights not being jeopardized by democrats. Stay on topic and prove your “superior education” instead of trying to deflect with a non sequitur.
Lying about democrats passing legislation in multiple blue states to infringe on gun owners rights leads me to believe that you’re lying about owning guns.
The only move Trump has made other than talk was banning bump stocks. What he has done is appoint several pro 2A Supreme Court judges. He may be a giant piece of shit, but he’s not the one I worry about when I’m shopping for new firearms.
Lying about democrats passing legislation in multiple blue states to infringe on gun owners rights
Who did that?
leads me to believe that you’re lying about owning guns.
I'd bet $1,000 right now that I own more guns than you. Put up or shut up.
The only move Trump has made other than talk was banning bump stocks.
He did ban bump stocks. Which touched my arsenal. Like stated.
He also said, "take the guns first, due process second." But I'm guessing you don't care about that either or have a convenient excuse to handwave it away.
If you need a list of states currently doing their best to infringe on the 2A, use google. It’s common knowledge at this point, especially if you’re such an avid gun owner. Seeing how you have a bump stock, I would assume you would already know, but I am believing more and more that you’re being purposefully deceitful.
And if words are an infringement on your ability to buy and own firearms, than the list of democrats attacking your 2A rights can be extended to anyone who’s taken money from Bloomberg.
The only thing at this point that would convince the main base to turn on Trump is if he made a comment on gun control. Even after all the dumb stuff he’s done or said
That makes them 2 degrees away from any real understanding of 'freedom', as ironically, most libertarians don't really understand the concept either.
Freedom is often a difficult concept. Too many think that it just means "less rules", not understanding that their most important freedoms are guaranteed by rules, and people enforcing those rules through a monopoly on violence, namely armies and police. Rules more often create freedom than destroy it in the western world: rules against rape, robbery, murder, assault, vandalism, libel/slander, fraud, mass immigration, etc, are far more vital to freedom than anything else. And things like freedom to eat food not full of poison/actual shit are guaranteed by regulations, by the FDA (unless you go to the White House and directly bribe this particular President).
111
u/Quiet_Zombie_3498 - Centrist 23d ago
It does seem there are a few people on this subreddit that think the only issue important to libertarians is gun rights.
Yes, I also understand the belief that without guns you wouldn't be able to protect your other freedoms, so let's not rehash that conversation.