Pond James Pond
New member
They are not armed for self-defense--they are equipped and ready for combat at the the platoon+ level.
Then this makes my inquiry "To what end?" even more pertinent.
They are not armed for self-defense--they are equipped and ready for combat at the the platoon+ level.
I'll be honest, I now want a gun that shoots ballots at people.The word PATRIOT has been so changed in the last few years. It now seems to stand for "THUG WITH GUN'. In America, we shoot ballots at each other, not bullets. We are better than Banana republics, so now we need to act better. Grant.
Or poll-worker intimidation. Hard to see what they are 'defending'.
Possibly defending against the late arrival of more truckloads of previously unknown ballots?
The 2nd amendment doesn't say we have the right to keep and bear arms in good taste.
Far too many folks insisting that any from of gun ownership is a God given right.
Not being critical of poor and irresponsible examples of gun ownership means we condone it, and puts us all into the same category.
The second amendment starts out with "A WELL REGULATED MILITIA" which almost every state has in the form of NATIONAL GUARD.
To imply that an armed mob that wants to overturn an election or a mask mandate is a well regulated militia, is ABSURD.
Placing a crucifix in a jar of urine, photographing it and displaying it in public as "Art", may be legal, but it certainly wasn't right, at least as far as most of us were concerned way back when (Maplethorpe's "Piss Christ", circa 1987).
Burning a flag is also legal, but most of us agree it isn't right. In fact, we know it is just plain wrong.