Fahernheit911-thread two

[kandrathe]

I do agree with you. :) (See above to your response to Nystal).

But, let's set the way back machine to 1776. The skirmish at Lexington and Concord was due to the British trying to impose control upon the farmers by disarming them. Now, lets project to a hypothetical future where a tyrant or tyranical minority movement takes control of the government and is able to remove one or more of the safeguards by stacking the Supreme Court and/or legislature. This is certainly an extreme stretch of the imagination given the situation in the world today, but in another century or two the US might be no more significant than the Ottoman Turks. But, if you are removing the ability of the populace to own the means of resisting the tyranny and in effect any armed resistance would be illegal. I'm not just talking about .38 specials or long guns. The reality of 1776 was that the Americans were a major manufacturing center for Britain, and as such many of the citizens had better weapons than the British Army. The citizenry organized themselves into paramilitary units, ala Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys. It is my opinion that if another revolution or civil war happens in America, the constitution should support the rights of the People to take control of their government from an usurper.