03-30-2012, 05:12 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-30-2012, 05:20 PM by Pantalaimon.)
(03-30-2012, 04:30 PM)kandrathe Wrote: It was Joel Barlow, however, who most eloquently articulated the vital role of arms in American republican thought. Barlow firmly believed that one of America's greatest strengths rested in "making every citizen a soldier, and every soldier a citizen; not only permitting every man to arm, but obliging him to arm." Whereas in Europe this "would have gained little credit; or at least it would have been regarded as a mark of an uncivilized people, extremely dangerous to a well ordered society,"
Amusingly enough, aren't the Swiss rather well known for a similar philosophy of militia and general culture of order?
More to the point, given the state of military technology, I fail to see how the right to own small arms is at all relevant to keeping the government in check. If a hypothetical US government wished to oppress its people, it couldn't possibly do a worse job of it than what we're already seeing in places such as Syria. You would see the might of a modern military: armour, machine guns, indirect fire. All of which are specifically designed to nullify the threat of small arms combatants.
Taking the original argument for gun ownership to its logical conclusion: if the 2nd Amendment is truly about a check on the government, Americans should thus be able to purchase and own the sorts of weaponry that IS tightly regulated, such as claymores, anti-tank armaments, fully automated assault rifles, grenades and the like. Yet, other than some extremists, I don't think we see any debate on control of those weapons. But heaven forbid someone takes our handguns away!
I can't see how gun ownership today has any deterrent effect on a government wishing to opress its own people. Full stop. The deterrent comes with having a military that is sworn to uphold certain rights and freedoms, and would refuse to execute unlawful orders from said oppressive government.
(03-30-2012, 09:59 AM)AngryCommie Wrote: I mean, I guess no one can stop someone from making racist or related hate remarks
Only if they're on a social network, in which case Britain can, upon pain of incarceration.