Our 2nd Amendment right to bear arms keeps our government from becoming Totalitarian.

[kiwimac]

The next step after that would be to repeal the first amendment, at which time certain Americans would fight. But since they won't have the right to bear arms, they will be fighting with their fists against a totalitarian, Antichrist government implementing the mark of the beast on everyone. God please let it be a pre-tribulation rapture! That is all I have to say...

Rot and nonsense.

 

[justbyfaith]

No, actuallly it is salt which acts as a preserving agent to keep rot and nonsense (like that of @kiwimac's) from ruling the world, as is described in the book of Revelation.

 

[justbyfaith]

The preaching of the truth of God's word is rot and nonsense to those who are perishing, but unto us who are saved it is the power of God...1 Corinthians 1:18.

 

[justbyfaith]

Trusting and relying on YHVH (God) by grace through faith in Jesus is A LOT more important, in any and every counttry.

We have protected freedoms concerning worship of Jesus Christ in the United States because of the Constitution, even though those freedoms are often violated.

 

[justbyfaith]

A citizen has the right to protect himself from such things as illegal search and seizure.

What's funny about it, @yeshuaslavejeff?

 

[justbyfaith]

This claim has nothing to do with your prior claim, that a country without a "right to bear arms" has a totalitarian government.

Think about it. A country that has all the power over weapons can oppress its people much more easily. When the common people have access to weapons for self-defense, the government will think twice about oppressing certain people, because they can defend themselves against that oppression more effectively.

 

[justbyfaith]

deleted: reason: pre-peat of post #27.

 

[justbyfaith]

Not when they have Nukes, Drones, Tanks, Battleships, F-35s etc. and you have semi-auto weaponry.

Drop a nuke on someone with a submachine gun? I suppose stranger things have happened.

 

[Yarddog]

'nuff said!

This is far from correct. Nothing in the 2nd amendment allows for Americans to rise up against government.

 

[pat34lee]

So what keeps the governments of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Great Britain, France, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Iceland, Belgium, and Holland from becoming totalitarian?

Us. As usual.

 

[kiwimac]

Us. As usual.

Heiferdust!

 

[sfs]

Us. As usual.

How exactly are we preventing the government of New Zealand from becoming totalitarian?

 

[justbyfaith]

This is far from correct. Nothing in the 2nd amendment allows for Americans to rise up against government.

It is not that Americans will rise up against government, but that because we have the right to bear arms, the government will think twice before implementing abuses and oppresion against Americans. The government of the U.S. is a republic/democracy partially because citizens have the power to defend themselves against a totalitarian type of order. The 2nd amendment is indeed therefore a protective safeguard against someone in the government taking us over with military power, transforming us from a republic/democracy into a totalitarian regime.

 

[sfs]

The 2nd amendment is indeed therefore a protective safeguard against someone in the government taking us over with military power, transforming us from a republic/democracy into a totalitarian regime.

This is a weaker claim than your previous version, which said that without the 2nd Amendment the US would become a totalitarian state. Based on the actual history of democracies, though, this claim is also wrong.

If you look at cases in recent history where democracies have been transformed into authoritarian states, you will find a common pattern. Rather than the military simply stepping in and overthrowing the legitimate government, what's happened is that broadly popular authoritarian movements have come into power, often by democratic means, and then undermined or eliminated democracy and freedom. This was true across a broad swathe of Europe after World War I (including most notably the Fascists in Italy and the Nazis and Germany, but also multiple other authoritarian movements), it was true of the Peronists in Argentina, and it's true of the governments of Poland, Hungary and Turkey today.

These authoritarian movements have been characterized by extreme nationalism, xenophobia, contempt for democratic norms and any kind of "weakness", and embrace of the need for a strong leader. To the extent that armed citizens outside the government played any role in the loss of democracy in most of these cases, it was to support the authoritarians as paramilitary units.

The same kind of anti-democratic, authoritarian impulse exists in the United States, and is currently embodied in Donald Trump and his supporters. The same nationalism, xenophobia and scapegoating, the contempt for "losers" and embrace of "strength", the undermining of democratic norms -- the whole authoritarian package(*). Those who are most likely to share this vision of the US -- rightwing Republicans -- also happen to be those most likely to be heavily armed. If authoritarianism really does come to the US in the foreseeable future, it will be supported by armed citizens, not opposed.

(*) Though fortunately with a leader who lacks the drive and the discipline to be really effective.

 

[Yarddog]

It is not that Americans will rise up against government, but that because we have the right to bear arms, the government will think twice before implementing abuses and oppresion against Americans.

That has no basis in reality. Nothing in the creation of the 2nd amendment was about this. The US Constitution has within its framework all that is needed through the balance of power between the three branches of government and free elections. The right to bear arms is about protection of state and federal government by the militias which was made up by the people of the communities across the 13 colonies.

The government of the U.S. is a republic/democracy partially because citizens have the power to defend themselves against a totalitarian type of order.

Totally incorrect, unless you consider the totalitarian order a foreign kingdom.

The 2nd amendment is indeed therefore a protective safeguard against someone in the government taking us over with military power, transforming us from a republic/democracy into a totalitarian regime.

Again, incorrect. Today, the 2nd amendment rights would be a last line of defense against an invading army but nothing to do with "someone" in our government taking anyone over. Each member of our armed forces takes an oath to protect our Constitution against enemies foreign and domestic.

The Declaration of Independence spells out what tyranny is and this cannot occur as long as the people have the right to vote into office those that enact of laws.

 

[Arcangl86]

It is not that Americans will rise up against government, but that because we have the right to bear arms, the government will think twice before implementing abuses and oppresion against Americans. The government of the U.S. is a republic/democracy partially because citizens have the power to defend themselves against a totalitarian type of order. The 2nd amendment is indeed therefore a protective safeguard against someone in the government taking us over with military power, transforming us from a republic/democracy into a totalitarian regime.

It didn't stop Jim Crow.

 

[Darkhorse]

It didn't stop Jim Crow.

That's right - because in many jurisdictions blacks were not allowed to own guns, just like they were not allowed to vote, or have equal protection under the law in many ways. Once Reconstruction ended, the Constitution didn't apply to them.

The NRA was established in 1871. One of its first campaigns was to promote and restore gun rights for blacks.

 

[tulc]

'nuff said!

...not even sort of true.
tulc(nuff said)

 

[justbyfaith]

I"m not going to argue. However, the United States is in danger of democratically taking away the 2nd amendment. If or when that happens, I will only sadly have to say, "I told you so," because the 2nd amendment does indeed act as a protection against certain abuses of authority and oppressive actions of government. And therefore removing the 2nd amendment, if it happens, will be the first step towards government removing our other most basic freedoms.

 

[Yarddog]

I"m not going to argue. However, the United States is in danger of democratically taking away the 2nd amendment. If or when that happens, I will only sadly have to say, "I told you so," because the 2nd amendment does indeed act as a protection against certain abuses of authority and oppressive actions of government. And therefore removing the 2nd amendment, if it happens, will be the first step towards government removing our other most basic freedoms.

You shouldn't argue when you lack any facts to support your position. The 2nd amendment is safe and sound and that has been made clear in case after case which the Supreme Court has heard. Stop loving in fear because of what some lying right wing organization says but cannot provide any evidence of. They want you scared so they can manipulate you.