I am probably wasting my time trying to talk sense to people who think they know more than other people.
Anyway:
First, not everyone has the same definition of the word "tyranny." Some conservatives view Obamacare as tyrannical while many liberals view it as not going far enough in terms of nationalized health care. Furthermore, a law or tax viewed as despotic by some citizens might also be regarded as a necessity by the government. In the late 1700s, some Americans viewed the Founders in the same manner that many of us view Bush or Obama. Whether it was anger of taxes in the Whiskey Rebellion, or unfair treatment of veterans in Shay's Rebellion, armed Americans have never been able to overthrow their government, even in the early years of the country.Simple fact: the Founders might have given citizens the right to bear arms, they viewed any rebellion to their authority as a mortal threat to the republic. Also, as Richard Brookhiser, the historian and senior editor at the National Review, states, it's the responsibility of citizens to vote or debate, not engage in violence in order to change legislation.
The real lesson here is that any illusion that owning one gun, or one hundred guns, would frighten or alter the way government behaves is not only unrealistic, but something George Washington would find unacceptable. The view propagated by the NRA that gun ownership keeps the federal government "in check" is not only historically inaccurate, but also contrary to the actions of our Founding Fathers.
Got that?
Looking back on recent events over the last few weeks has reinforced how truly fortunate we are in this country. In this country, the people have accepted the rule of law, and with a few exceptions, are willing to obey it, even if they don't wholeheartedly support it.
ReplyDeleteOne has but to look at the number of countries that not only have the periodic coup attempt, but active insurgencies. Here, most of the time, such groups that have aspirations like this get to a certain size and intent and someone drops a dime on them.
The citizenry are very tolerant and invested in making our system work, both the tea party AND the socialists. Yes, people on either side will quite vocally disagree with whatever determination our courts make when protecting our rights, but we respect the decision. Some might even look forward to the judicial table turning and seeing their side win in the future, but it works, and that is what's important.
I would suggest that the government isn't afraid because our system is self correcting and before we would get to the point of an effective insurgent group being viable, meaning it would need the support of the citizens, the process already in place would change to reflect the wishes of its citizens.
As for the potential for success for an insurrection or rebellion in this country, past history seems to have our score at about 50% I believe.
"with a few exceptions" is right, but with maniacs like James Yeager preaching nonsense and who knows how many followers take him seriously, it's a serious problem.
DeleteThat's why rules and laws work. Most Americans are law abiding even when they disagree with the law. So making certain laws and regulations about guns will work.
Delete"Most Americans are law abiding even when they disagree with the law."
DeleteYou are correct. Most Americans are law abiding. And our laws reflect the will of the people. Which would explain why the majority of proposed intrusive gun laws introduced fail to pass.
For example, only nine states allow law enforcement discretion to deny a carry permit. And two of these states are in danger of becoming shall issue because of a federal court decision.
The law would also work for rules helping reduce gun deaths and injuries, but you refuse to accept that. It might hurt your gun loon credentials.
DeleteYes, the pendulum is still swinging in the wrong direction. Enjoy, it won't last.
Delete