This is, of course complete drivel. One person was arrested for a post that calling for families to be burned to death in a hotel during a race riot and attempts were made to do this. Or perhaps you believe incitement to murder is legitimate use of freedom of speech?
Nobody healthy wants violence, you're right. People committing acts of violence should be arrested for it, you're right. The slippery slope to control over speech is lubed with good intentions. The slippery slope to oppression is lubed by disarming the people.
As if you could outgun the police with their military equipment. Let alone the military itself (and it has already come to this - what with Trump turning the military loose on Los Angeles). SCOTUS intentionally misread the 2nd Amendment to save their own skins. It's not more nuanced than that.
Every successful under-armed resistance group in history would like to disagree. The idea Is to make systematic oppression of people as expensive as possible. Unless you trust them to never ever do it if you say stop. You may trust police and ICE but they haven't given me good reason to.
I absolutely trust neither. That is not my view, which is that here no underarmed resistance group can succeed. Underarmed resistance groups often have home court advantage (e.g., v. Redcoats). The undoing of the abuses by ICE and the police must come another way, and it won't be at the OK Corral.
An interesting point and one of the good arguments to bear arms is to defend yourselves from a lawless government and its agents. Well, you have both now and I don't see much an an armed resistance. If half what is going on was happening in France, the Fench would burn the place to the ground.
I believe it may be because we are trying to avoid a second civil war.
Once you become a mature democracy, say in another four or five hundred years, you may find you finally have no need to carry a weapon, vote for a wannabe dictator or consider paedophilia an acceptable life choice. Sounds a long time but let us assure you it's worth the wait.
Inshallah! Would be lovely. I'm still going to keep mine.
You sound eminently sane and I'd certainly not advocate taking your weapon away. But to hand assault rifles out like candy to anyone who wants one has to be asking for trouble. I used to own both a rifle and a shotgun but the checks for the licences were long, tedious and understandable.
By this "logic", the people will only remain "free" if they have unfettered access to nuclear submarines and tomahawk missiles. It's nothing more than retard soup that you yanks have been force fed so many times in your life you never even question it.
Freedom of speech can be misused to take away from other peoples freedom of speech or expression. There are rules in freedom of speech that if not respected, quickly can become de facto censorship regardless. Freedom of speech is like the free market, you need rules otherwise you get monopolies
Who makes speech rules and how are they ultimately enforced?
There are no freedom of speech laws as such in the UK. There are, however, laws against the incitement to break other other laws. There are also, of course, civil laws which cover slander and libel.
America, the land of the free. Free to get stopped by the police hundreds of times in your life. Free to have parties that can’t go on past midnight. Free to go bankrupt when you can’t pay medical bills. And free to buy your kids bulletproof backpacks. You guys are so free!
I don't want to rain on your parade or anything but (assuming you're American) I'm pretty sure you're _already_ being oppressed. No-one's rising up with their much vaunted Second Amendment rights to fight off the tyranny of ICE, are they?
It's true they should. We're not organizing well enough.