Skip to comments.Bill Maher: It’s ‘Ridiculous,’ ‘Quaint’ & ‘Nonsensical’ to Think 2nd Amendment Can Prevent Tyranny
Posted on 05/05/2013 12:29:39 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
HBO host Bill Maher had MSNBCs Lawrence ODonnell as one of his guests on Real Time Friday night, and the two were adamant that the Second Amendment cannot protect against tyranny (and that such a conversation shouldnt even really be happening in this age).
After pointing out the poll where 44% of Republicans said an armed revolution might be necessary in order to protect liberties in the next few years, compared to 18% of Democrats, Maher said:
Can we get to, first of all, how ridiculous it is for people to think that the Second Amendment protects them from tyranny. Didnt Waco solve that? We just had the anniversary a couple of weeks ago. Remember Waco? You know what they had in Waco? They had like 1.9 million rounds of ammunition; they had .50 caliber machine guns; they had grenades What did the government have? Everything else. The winner and still champion the United States government. Thinking the Second Amendment protects you from tyranny is like thinking the First Amendment protects you from Thor. Its quaint. Its ridiculous. Its nonsensical. And they never get called [on] it!
After Pete Hegseth, a veteran, asked whether Maher could imagine a scenario even in the abstract where liberty might need to be preserved with a weapon, ODonnell said to audience applause: Zero. Were past it. Were past it!
This country [is] long past the point where you would ever have to rise in arms against this government.(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
and sidewinders in the case of the Soviets.
Yes Bill, the Davidians were out gunned and didn't have a chance.
The government called in the military to use a tank, tear-gas and flash-bangs to incinerate the compound, killing every man, woman & child that stood up to your beloved government.
I have read that:
“It is estimated that Texans own around 51 million firearms.” (probably a low figure)
You might estimate that the national figure is on the order of 250 million (probably more).
And I know some farm women who in a bad scrape I would feel comfortable shooting alongside.
“a Million serious operators”? Yes that is very credible.
The left can be very brutal, almost inhuman. But they are badly outnumbered, without their useful idiots. And those useful idiots work at the polls, but not when it comes to defending others.
“the people of afghanistan who effectively stopped 2 superpowers using AKs”
Not throwing cold water on the concept of popular resistance but go figure: every AK-47 in Afghanistan has probably been wielded by many pairs of hands, and the only ones still living are the ones clutching it right now.
In other words, they grow ‘em as fast as we can kill ‘em.
Their fanatical paradise-guaranteeing religion combined with their wild tribal culture stretching back centuries are powerful factors that normal civilized societies simply lack.
Is resistance to our growing domestic tyranny futile? Of course not! But an estimate of its true costs must be made. In 1776 it was simple: “We pledge our lives, our fortunes, our sacred honor”. And so it began.
Diane Feinsteins Husband Rakes in the Cash from Government Projects
Posted on May 4, 2013 by Marilyn Assenheim Filed under Economics, Politics
Senator Dianne Feinsteins husband, Richard Blum, created the investment firm, Blum Capital. Blum Capital is part owner of the construction firm, Perini-Zachary-Parsons. Dots connected so far? Perini-Zachary-Parsons has won the bid to build high speed rail track that will link Madera to Fresno, California. Once built, the Reason Foundation estimates that the railway will lose between $124 million to $373 million a year.
If youve never heard of Madera California and have barely heard of Fresno, you are not alone. But Californias mania in pursuing this fiscally suicidal venture is not what is spotlighted, here. As Mr. Rogers might have asked, Can you say Conflict of interest? Or graft?
How did Perini-Zachary-Parsons manage to snag this prize? With the lowest bid, Blums company, miraculously, came up the victor. Their bid, $985,142,530, comes to $35 million per mile. At the moment, no one is asking the question of how it happened. The project is state funded. And, once again, Senator Feinsteins dynasty makes out while the state and nation she represents tunnels ever deeper into the septic tank.
Feinstein has been tied to cronyism, using taxpayer funds, several times in the past. According to Breitbart.com, in a report from June, 2012, Feinstein used her position and the information she was privy in order to:
Millions are willing to kill for socialism.
Many fewer will die for it.
When innocents shot back at tyranny at Waco, it wasn’t tried again for 15 years. A few armed homeowners would have stopped the Boston marital law quick.
I don’t see why we can’t own mortars and belt fed ammo crew weapons.
CWII the states will call militia up and at first, it will be Bring Your Own Rifle.
Yes Bill, it may go the way you suggest.
The problem is that it probably won't.
Not that I am advocating anything but I am too tired of all the “cross this line and we will get mad” talk.
We are almost fully Soviet now. the only reason we are not carted to the gulags is because they don’t fear us. It doesn’t matter what the Benghazi hearings come up with. “What difference does it make?” Clinton took bj’s in the oval orifice and all he got was a piece of paper that said that he was impeached. So what?
Just the govt. going nuts and trying to use the military to go against the American people, you are right.
It they can set up a scenario where it is made to appear as if some militant group has teamed up with a foreign govt/terrorist to wage war against the US, the military would squash them like a bug.
Well to be fair to the folks at Waco they did not deploy their armaments. They clearly didn’t want a full on war with the Federal Government if they had a lot more federal agents would’ve died. They would’ve still been put down but a contained small group is a far cry from the kind of situation that would occur if Revolution broke out. The military would be very unlikely to remain united in such a situation. Soldiers would refuse to fire on civilians. It happened in Syria and anyone who doesn’t think it would happen to a greater degree here are naïve.
Truthfully in our modern era a coordinated armed resistance would have an advantage on the ground in a modern country. A country would be quickly paralyzed in an all out rebellion and that would benefit the revolutionaries. Every move the unpopular government would make would help grow the rebellion. Let them start firing on citizens and declaring marshal law and it would get worse for them. Sure one man and a gun can’t hold off the government but one man martyr is very powerful image. Waco and Ruby Ridge both fed greatly into the distrust of the federal government. I couldn’t imagine anyone reading about Ruby Ridge without being incensed to righteous anger towards the feds.
Having guns means you can resist if it comes to it. It doesn’t mean you wont die in your defense but it means you can exact a cost something that will give pause to would be tyrants.
When the SHTF, the damage will be done with software, not guns.
Yeah you are probably right.
Then why couldn’t over a million troops, with jet aircraft, helicopters, tanks, battleships, missiles, smart bombs and every technology of the time, couldn’t defeat peasants armed with AK-47s in Vietnam?
Its Ridiculous, Quaint & Nonsensical to Think FIRST Amendment Can Prevent Tyranny, Maher, you jackass partisan media shill.
Three, actually. The British Empire, the Soviet Union and us.
Waco was (a) a cult, not anti-government.
He can’t understand that it’s logic,but it’s par for him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.