• skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Haven’t needed one yet. Might need one in the next few upcoming years if things keep going as poorly as they have been. The second amendment was intended for citizens to protect themselves from invading forces and malevolent American government alike. We haven’t yet had a desperate enough need to exercise it in such a fashion, so instead it’s merely built up a gun nut culture in America. But it’s there for such times as we find ourselves approaching.

      I sincerely, desperately hope it doesn’t come to that. But I’m comforted by the fact that one of the favorite tools of my possible enemy is one that also guarantees I am never defenseless.

    • Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      The same could be said about nukes. You hope they’re never needed, but the fact that they’re there helps keep things in check.

      • macniel@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Does it really though? It certainly doesn’t level the playing field between those who have nukes and those who gave them up to get a guarantee of sovereignty…

          • macniel@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            The military has drones though, that can used against the population at any time. How do you defend against that with arms from the civilian market? Or just tanks.