Hypothetical question about the 2nd amendment..

I love how this question is couched. It is most telling, isn't it? The simple fact is that if a tyranny arises, the shooting won't start with We the People. It will begin with the government. What keeps the government from firing the first shot? The fear that an armed populace will shoot back. That's how it works. Now for the proof. Every tyranny of the 20th Century stifled its ambitions until it first disarmed the citizens. They did it "lawfully" of course and the citizens acquiesced because they wanted to be "safe". They couldn't conceive that their leaders wanted anything but to keep them safe. Sound familiar?

Since it is hypothetical LCpl Mark Lefler: It would be more logical to shoot those who are in favor of stricter gun control for law abiding citizens; stabbing or slashing people who are in favor of stricter control for sharp bladed weapons; and better yet removing the voice boxes of those who preach freedom of speech yet use "tolerance" as a club to criminalize speech or cations that don't meet their definition of tolerance :-)

I think this type of statement is used by those "lesser informed". That's not saying you at all, but to those who think OMG they're taking my weapons away, OMG they're invading Texas, OMG they're going to take away curly fries at Arby's, OMG Rosy O'Donnell's going to be the next MCPON....and Obama's to blame. In some of these cases, they refuse to look at the whole Constitution, or Dec of Independence, but can tell you all about the one part of one amendment that suits them; and even then it's not correct. They get all riled up, go buy weapons and claim they're going to take America back. From whom? When was it invaded? That Red Dawn remake sucked ass BTW and if that's your reasoning, you need more help than any weapon can give you. And all these weapons suddenly bought are on FB pages from folks selling them. I know this much being I'm a member of a few of them here in VA (always on the hunt for a good deal)
There is a legal way to make grievances known to the government, and even effect change in it. Problem is it takes time, and some folks think that having a Bradley in their driveway will solve it quicker. I like weapons and have a few of my own, but I'm not dumb enough to think getting a few shit talking youtube, FB "hero's" or MEGAPatriots together are going to solve anything. My vote does that. My due diligence in researching a candidate's history does that. Talking with people and not just the like minded ones will help make a change. No matter what party line you lean on, we do have some common grounds that we all hold dear. If there ever was a coup to overthrow the government, we have officially sunk BELOW the lowest of the low because we allowed our minds to be corrupted by the money and minds of those who will be sitting on a ranch somewhere calling shots and not lifting a finger. Those same assclowns will be the first ones saying they had no part in anything should it go south, yet be the first ones claiming victory with their starbucks cup in hand. If you really want someone out of office, become that next INFORMED youtube sensation. That INFORMED blogger, that INFORMED radio/radio host that can make all politicians squirm with the hard questions. Peace effects change because you have a wider audience to talk to, and they're alive to hear it. War is the last resort of the intelligent and the first resort of the weak minded.