• AnonTwo@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 年前

    …Doesn’t the millitary still vastly out-arm any armed citizen in today’s age, both in actual weapons and in training to use said weapons?

      • Zorque@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 年前

        Lots and lots of military contracts that made a few people a lot of money? With millions of civilian deaths, and maybe thousands of military deaths?

      • AnonTwo@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 年前

        Looks like it never reached the point of millitary. They just fought police. And Uvande showed everyone the competence of police.

        It really just looks like the government made no efforts to enforce the SC’s ruling. So it works if they don’t care.

          • Zorque@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 年前

            I think anyone who thinks greater access to tools of death and destruction is a net positive is deluding themselves.

            It may be net neutral, in that giving people weapons to “counter” other weapons negates other weapons… but it doesn’t protect them, it just gives them a chance to hurt others as much as they’re hurt themselves.

            It’s predicated on the idea of mutually assured destruction, but in not so nearly a potent manner as nuclear arms… which, in and of themselves, are not a universally potent enough deterrent to prevent war. Just enough that those weapons themselves aren’t used (more than twice). People still get hurt and killed by guns. And as any defender of gun death statistics will tell you, more often by the people who own them.

            If you consider that a net positive… well, I kind of feel sorry for you.