Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="gst" data-source="post: 109440" data-attributes="member: 373">The point I think that is being missed is not in any &quot;comparison&quot; but pointing out the fact of what the govt is capable of reiterating the need for the 2nd amendment. If we want to paint the Indians as &quot;domestic terrorists&quot; , you could make that argument if you wished to over look the fact a govt wanted lands they were on and they were simply defending what they believed was theirs. &nbsp;But the fact remains, the govt slaughtered both women and children and elders at Wounded Knee and justified their actions. We have an example fresh in history of a group of Americans that were labeled &quot;domestic terrorists&quot; because they were defending what they believed was theirs. Should that grant the govt the right to kill the women and children and elders of their families?&nbsp; (and we have a thread to rehash that yet again so no need to do so here) Should the govt have the power to simply label someone or put someone on a list to determine their right to own a fire arm or be slaughtered?&nbsp; Look to what happened to the Weinmer Republic in Germany just prior to Hitler taking power and what those actions ultimately led to. This govt is becoming what we fought a revolution to become free from.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="gst, post: 109440, member: 373"] The point I think that is being missed is not in any "comparison" but pointing out the fact of what the govt is capable of reiterating the need for the 2nd amendment. If we want to paint the Indians as "domestic terrorists" , you could make that argument if you wished to over look the fact a govt wanted lands they were on and they were simply defending what they believed was theirs. But the fact remains, the govt slaughtered both women and children and elders at Wounded Knee and justified their actions. We have an example fresh in history of a group of Americans that were labeled "domestic terrorists" because they were defending what they believed was theirs. Should that grant the govt the right to kill the women and children and elders of their families? (and we have a thread to rehash that yet again so no need to do so here) Should the govt have the power to simply label someone or put someone on a list to determine their right to own a fire arm or be slaughtered? Look to what happened to the Weinmer Republic in Germany just prior to Hitler taking power and what those actions ultimately led to. This govt is becoming what we fought a revolution to become free from. [/QUOTE]

Verification

What is the most common fish caught on this site?

Reply to thread

Recent Posts

Friends of NDA