In 1787, a state (or ad hoc militia) was a serious threat to the central government (see the Whiskey Rebellion) and that's exactly what the states feared, a central government going tyrannical. Ergo, the Second Amendment to satisfy the doubts about a strong central government. At that time, militias and any quickly formed federal army wo…
In 1787, a state (or ad hoc militia) was a serious threat to the central government (see the Whiskey Rebellion) and that's exactly what the states feared, a central government going tyrannical. Ergo, the Second Amendment to satisfy the doubts about a strong central government. At that time, militias and any quickly formed federal army would be equipped with the same weaponry and tactics. Fair fight. This situation has changed dramatically in past 236 years and militias of any sort are now wildly unprepared to face America's standing military. The NRA and MAGA nuts who think they can take on the military with their AR 15s are a few stinger missiles, Cobra gunships and Seal Team Sixes shy of sanity.
If we're talking about some idiots in their fantasy cosplay dreams, you are absolutely right.
If we're talking about a national response to an actual tyrannical military, the numbers make things decidedly less clear.
I don't say that to justify very much of anything of the right's current position on guns, but to note that the basic concept of firearms acting as a potential check on government over-reach isn't quite as idiotic as some would paint it. For all the power and reach of our military, it is not built to be an occupation force / counter-insurgency force for a nation of 340M people.
I also don't think it is the ground to use in fighting to get better gun safety.
The Air Force and Navy may have a part to play in making things much clearer to clearer heads. The idea that any ground based militia could have any hope is part of the MAGA idiocracy.
Remind me again of how much the RAF and Royal Navy were able to bring their considerable force to bear in The Troubles.
I grant that the stereotypical militia types we have now are idiots, but gravy seals aren't the only potential resistance that could crop up to a truly tyrannical government. Any serious resistance to the US government isn't going to be trying to go toe to toe with either of those branches. In fact, they'd rarely go toe to toe with any serious force.
Remember, for all its power, the US military isn't built to be an occupation force, especially of a country the size of ours. It is also highly doubtful that the entire force would be super enthusiastic about the mission.
Beyond that, keep in mind that a resistance or underground or whatever doesn't have to eventually seize full control. They may have more limited goals that don't require besting the US military in the field.
If the military decides to support tyranny (strong man rule), it's game over for democracy in any case. So yours is a different argument contextually. I don't disagree but I assume that more patriotic heads will prevail if a Trump or Trump wannabe attains the WH again and asks the military to enforce illegal orders against citizens or institutions.
Well, I do on day 1. But after the purges and key replacements, plenty of orders will be perfectly legal. And they likely won't go to the military at first. But if and when someone starts resisting Trump's newly created Federal Security Bureau...well that'd be armed insurrection, amirite?
The military oath is to the Constitution, not the presidency. Plenty of those orders will be unconstitutional as Milly so rightly feared. The jury is definitely out on the military's readiness to respond to an authoritarian like Trump.
And when Michael Flynn holds Milly's job? The day one orders won't be blatantly unconstitutional, but they'll stretch there...
And yeah, the jury's out on how the military will respond, but I'm not holding my breath. As I said, when some group resists some government agency, we'll have armed insurrection on our hands, and that will make quite a lot 'legal' especially for one of those open-ended emergencies we like to have.
We may however get lucky with Trump being too stupid to actually be effective at it.
Technically it is quite the pickle we would be in if he wins.
Though we could also bet on cheeseburger and the hope that his VP, while likely terrible, doesn't want to go down in history as the actual author of American Democracy's destruction. And for as easily ridiculed as that faint hope would be, it also isn't nothing.
I was going to make a crack about how they are also missing an intelligence apparatus and NSA style surveillance system. However it feels unnecessary when they take pictures of themselves with their toys and post the pics on social media from a cell phone denoting their exact location.
In 1787, a state (or ad hoc militia) was a serious threat to the central government (see the Whiskey Rebellion) and that's exactly what the states feared, a central government going tyrannical. Ergo, the Second Amendment to satisfy the doubts about a strong central government. At that time, militias and any quickly formed federal army would be equipped with the same weaponry and tactics. Fair fight. This situation has changed dramatically in past 236 years and militias of any sort are now wildly unprepared to face America's standing military. The NRA and MAGA nuts who think they can take on the military with their AR 15s are a few stinger missiles, Cobra gunships and Seal Team Sixes shy of sanity.
If we're talking about some idiots in their fantasy cosplay dreams, you are absolutely right.
If we're talking about a national response to an actual tyrannical military, the numbers make things decidedly less clear.
I don't say that to justify very much of anything of the right's current position on guns, but to note that the basic concept of firearms acting as a potential check on government over-reach isn't quite as idiotic as some would paint it. For all the power and reach of our military, it is not built to be an occupation force / counter-insurgency force for a nation of 340M people.
I also don't think it is the ground to use in fighting to get better gun safety.
The Air Force and Navy may have a part to play in making things much clearer to clearer heads. The idea that any ground based militia could have any hope is part of the MAGA idiocracy.
Remind me again of how much the RAF and Royal Navy were able to bring their considerable force to bear in The Troubles.
I grant that the stereotypical militia types we have now are idiots, but gravy seals aren't the only potential resistance that could crop up to a truly tyrannical government. Any serious resistance to the US government isn't going to be trying to go toe to toe with either of those branches. In fact, they'd rarely go toe to toe with any serious force.
Remember, for all its power, the US military isn't built to be an occupation force, especially of a country the size of ours. It is also highly doubtful that the entire force would be super enthusiastic about the mission.
Beyond that, keep in mind that a resistance or underground or whatever doesn't have to eventually seize full control. They may have more limited goals that don't require besting the US military in the field.
If the military decides to support tyranny (strong man rule), it's game over for democracy in any case. So yours is a different argument contextually. I don't disagree but I assume that more patriotic heads will prevail if a Trump or Trump wannabe attains the WH again and asks the military to enforce illegal orders against citizens or institutions.
I don't assume that at all.
Well, I do on day 1. But after the purges and key replacements, plenty of orders will be perfectly legal. And they likely won't go to the military at first. But if and when someone starts resisting Trump's newly created Federal Security Bureau...well that'd be armed insurrection, amirite?
The military oath is to the Constitution, not the presidency. Plenty of those orders will be unconstitutional as Milly so rightly feared. The jury is definitely out on the military's readiness to respond to an authoritarian like Trump.
And when Michael Flynn holds Milly's job? The day one orders won't be blatantly unconstitutional, but they'll stretch there...
And yeah, the jury's out on how the military will respond, but I'm not holding my breath. As I said, when some group resists some government agency, we'll have armed insurrection on our hands, and that will make quite a lot 'legal' especially for one of those open-ended emergencies we like to have.
We may however get lucky with Trump being too stupid to actually be effective at it.
This is quite the pickle we are in if we have to bet on stupidity to save the day.
Technically it is quite the pickle we would be in if he wins.
Though we could also bet on cheeseburger and the hope that his VP, while likely terrible, doesn't want to go down in history as the actual author of American Democracy's destruction. And for as easily ridiculed as that faint hope would be, it also isn't nothing.
damn all those wars we lost in the last 60 years didn’t get the memo
I was going to make a crack about how they are also missing an intelligence apparatus and NSA style surveillance system. However it feels unnecessary when they take pictures of themselves with their toys and post the pics on social media from a cell phone denoting their exact location.
😆