• EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      27 days ago

      It was also opposed by George Washington on the argument that “A bunch of farmers with guns will never defeat a trained army.” He basically did exactly that, but it took the support of one of the world’s largest super powers at the time in order to do it - France.

      Not to say don’t arm yourself. I plan on doing exactly that myself. But don’t expect to be overthrowing the dictatorship to come. There are no resistance groups being armed by the EU here.

      • Not_mikey@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        27 days ago

        Washington was talking about the militias that were present in the early parts of the war that were under trained and undisciplined. The red coats took them easily and they fled often so the continental congress started the continental army lead by Washington, which was a trained and disciplined army in the style of European standing armies, which was able to take on and even defeat the British occasionally.

        After the war the ruling elite still had this idealized vision of citizen militias protecting the liberty of white man and saw it as a less tyrannical, and cheaper model then the European professional standing army and made the second amendment to encourage it. Washington was saying that that system failed and will never work and that we should have a trained army ready to take on European powers if they come back.

        Now we have the worst of both worlds, a massive army that gobbles up tax dollars and a bunch of untrained citizens with guns who barely understand what a militia is much less can protect the liberty of the nation.

        • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          27 days ago

          Yeah, pretty much what I was getting at. We live in a country where everybody believes themselves to be the hero in their own Rambo style action movie.

          • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            27 days ago

            “Just another American who saw too many movies as a child? Another orphan of a bankrupt culture who thinks he’s John Wayne? Rambo? Marshal Dillon?”

            Edit: I can’t be the only person who’s seen Die Hard.

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      27 days ago

      that was before tanks and instant communication. the army would have been less organized and maybe you could have a chance against the government, especially as a militia. today you don’t.

      you do have a chance against a bunch of fuckwads who threaten you because the party they voted for won and the think they can rape freely now. just not the government.

          • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            26 days ago

            We have psychos trying to implement a theocratic government and oppressing women and minorities like Afghanistan

            • pyre@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              26 days ago

              lol… yeah but i meant in terms of using guns to oppose the government

      • WraithGear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        27 days ago

        The last three wars have been pretty recent, and haven’t not gone well against a foe no where near or equal. Not so much as a pyric victory, but an eventual unwillingness to keep wasting time and money and lives, and we just left. What do you call it when you just leave a war failing all your objectives and handing over territory to the enemy?

        • pyre@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          27 days ago

          what are you talking about? control over your own land is nothing like invading a remote country halfway around the world.

        • FindME@lemmy.myserv.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          25 days ago

          I’m not saying you are wrong, but the biggest difference, and one that actually matters, is that there was a very clear us vs. them defined and easily spotted. In Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan we were fighting against people that blended in and weren’t being actively turned on by their neighbors. Here, you can bet every dickish Dick that voted red would happily report on the neighbors that they even have an iota of suspicion about resisting the orange cunt.

          • WraithGear@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            25 days ago

            Actually you are describing how it would not be different at all than these other wars. An insurgency in the us would be particularly hard to pick out. There would be no outward appearance between “us” or “them” we are a very diverse nation after all. Also, in these wars neighbors were turning each other in left and right. It was nearly impossible to determine if it was legitimate, or a personal squabble, or some random in order to get brownie points with the us. People are no different over here.

            Besides, i will not entertain the idea that fighting against tyranny is wrong because it would be hard.

    • zabadoh@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      27 days ago

      That is historically true, unfortunately the conservative artificial supermajority Supreme Court doesn’t respect its own precedents and historical facts.

      • WraithGear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        27 days ago

        I mean the Supreme Court can say what they like. But their power is derived by the people. It can be taken back.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      27 days ago

      What a bunch of slave-owners thought about guns hundreds of years ago is not really relevant to today.

      And if you’re going to attack someone for thinking people should be armed for the wrong reason, maybe you should find better targets.

      • WraithGear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        27 days ago

        Whoa, I’m not attacking you. I have a difference in opinion as to why people should be armed. Not saying that one does not have a right to self defense, just that i put stock in the need to collectively hold the government accountable and fight tyranny

        • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          26 days ago

          i put stock in the need to collectively hold the government accountable and fight tyranny

          It sounds good until the majority of gun owners in the country decide they like the tyranny.

            • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              26 days ago

              Not whatsoever, but we’re in the US, where although some leftists are armed, the dominant gun culture isn’t going to come out to defeat tyranny, they will come out to defend it. If Trump goes full dictator, these hypothetical armed antifascists resistance fighters will have to fight their way through legions of y’allqaeda before the US military (who I desperately hope will not recognize Trump’s authority in such a circumstance) ever has to worry about them.

              • WraithGear@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                26 days ago

                In that case, that sounds like the left needs to get weapons and become organized, like i recommend. And not turn over and assume that the majority will let them live free… as a treat.

                You are basically arguing to give up and die because it’s too hard.

                • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  26 days ago

                  You are basically arguing to give up die because it’s too hard.

                  I’m not arguing at all. The left should arm themselves. But if things go like they are going, they’ll never see the US military, it won’t be about fighting a tyrannical government; they’ll be fighting all their neighbors and relatives who are trying to defend that tyrannical government.

                  And frankly, echoing the other poster, ultimately that fight will likely be in the form of self-defense.

                  You don’t need to rebut my comments, I’m not really arguing with you. Just expressing doubt that any tyrannical government will be directly harmed by citizens exercising the 2A. You can disagree without trying to convince me I’m wrong, that’s just fine.

                  • WraithGear@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    26 days ago

                    If you resort to only self defense, you will lose. You do not project power by watching your neighbor fail to defend themselves and then wait for your turn. The sneering others give saying i think i am some Rambo able to fight off tyranny with just my wits and a rifle like an action hero, is literally the opposite of what i am saying. That would be more true of someone thinking could fight off the systemic oppression of tyranny by looking out for only for themselves.

                    If you don’t want to discuss this because you are unable to argue the point that’s fine, but these discussions are literally about trying to convince others holding opposite views that their point of view is wrong. It’s literally the point.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          27 days ago

          And you can see why, from what I already wrote, that is not likely to work unless the majority is on your side. And the military.

          • WraithGear@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            27 days ago

            The military has had a pretty lousy track record against gorilla warfare from much smaller, worse armed groups who, by the width of an ocean were unable to affect logistical lines, the means to project warfare, or the families of our soldiers. A Revolution within would be much worse.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              27 days ago

              How many innocent people died in those wars? It’s not very nice of you to be willing to put their lives on the line like that.

              • WraithGear@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                27 days ago

                Oh? Now it’s a discussion about who should be sacrificed and for what. Freedom always has a cost. I never removed myself from the possibility. But right now, the royal “we”, seem to be sacrificing the minority, the different, the poor, the non christian and it gets worse every day. Freedoms are slipping, corporations get stronger, and standards of living and hope for the future fades. This will only accelerate. Arguing to arm oneself for personal protection but not collective action will doom all, but the chosen, to be picked off one by one.

                  • WraithGear@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    27 days ago

                    When it’s needed. I don’t see a path that prevents tyranny or revolution, but that doesn’t mean there is none. You say that people should arm themselves, and i agree, the main difference being what we see as the threat i guess. But I take inspiration from the Black Panthers. I believe they were right and righteous in their actions, no matter what was taught in schools. And you know they were effective, because the state conspired against them and they got the NRA TO ARGUE FOR MORE RESTRICTIVE GUN LAWS because they have a certain power dynamic they want to uphold.