FBI raids Mar-a-Lago
(www.zerohedge.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (163)
sorted by:
The brownshirts don't want to get shot, and if they have to wonder whether they will be, they won't go as far for a tyrannical government. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn talks about this in The Gulag Archipelago, how things might have been different if the enforcers had been afraid they wouldn't come home.
And any government is going to think twice about doing something that might cause a shootout, if only for the optics.
You can't take down an army by yourself and guns can't do much against tanks etc but the point is not to make it easy for them. When it's easy for them they get a lot worse.
Deterrence is important.
I'm familiar with the Gulag quote. He was talking about axes in tight spaces though.
I respect everyone's opinions and replies, but I find all of the reasoning quite circular. Themes of deterence that are mostly speculative and untested.
I'm not arguing against gun ownership.
I just don't see how being armed prevents the State from coming after the individual common man other than making the individual cases a lot more tense and bloodier, all with the same outcome (the target being imprisoned or dead).
I'm not suggesting that I have any better ideas.
Just that I find the whole "fuck around and find out" type responses online to mostly be performative and not fleshed out.
If enough people make them resort to bloodshed instead of going quietly, oppressing the people becomes increasingly expensive and logistically difficult. Their tyranny thrives on acquiescence.
Guns (probably) aren't going to stop them if they're intent on destroying you but if they have an agenda other than bloodshed for its own sake, making the path of tyranny as costly as possible can make all the difference. Enough people banding together could deter them entirely, or at least force them to regroup.
The true effectiveness of civilian deterrence against a modern government might not be known but logistics, expenses and optics make a difference in any conflict.
I can't say how committed the "fuck around and find out" types are but I know it's always better to have guns and the will to use them than to have neither