The Reason for Owning Arms

Posted by Troy on 8th January 2013 in Current Events, Political

Someone recently sent me an article about the pros and cons of gun control.  While I could argue most all of his points, there is one in particular I would like to discuss.  He finds the concept of the original intent of the Second Amendment, that of defending ourselves against an oppressive government, laughable.  And this is where he is wrong.  As it is pointed out in Federalist Paper 46, the largest military a country can maintain is about 1/25th of those capable of bearing arms.  This means that the odds against the military are 1 to 24.  Of that, yes, they have tanks, but the French and the Russians have shown that people can improvise anti-tank weapons.  There is another psychological factor.  You see, it is easy for a military to oppress their fellow citizens when they are not shooting back.  It might give them a bad taste in their mouth, but they will suffer through.  When those same people are shooting at them and forcing the soldiers to shoot back and kill their fellow citizen, the more likely they are to turn on the government that hired them.  Query, if Obama ordered the military to open fire on citizens, do you think the military would be more prone to fight their fellow citizen or act to remove the President from office via force?  Would they they choose to massacre hundreds of thousands for the sake one one man?  Or would they kill that one man?  Without guns though, the military can just show up with tanks and guns, and everyone would be too afraid to do anything to them.  Oppression sets in, and that’s the end.  If the people of Syria and Egypt and Libya can overthrow governments that are willing to slaughter them, I think we stand a fighting chance too.

Long Live the Constitution!

Leave a Reply