Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: sneakypete
The main argument I have seen for bearing arms is it serves as a deterrent against tyranny. IF that is the case, if the govt can own one, then I should too.
175 posted on 06/19/2002 4:29:32 PM PDT by Cool Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies ]


To: Cool Guy
"The main argument I have seen for bearing arms is it serves as a deterrent against tyranny."

That and self-defense against attack by criminals ARE the resason the 2nd Amendment exists. This doesn't apply to nukes,though. They are a weapon that is on a "government to government" scale,and this has nothing to do with individual self-defense. Besides,you DO "own" them already. You own them because the gooberment owns and would use them in your name. Like I wrote earlier,nukes are in a special catagory because of the special risks involved with owning or possessing them. Your M-2,BAR,or M-16 isn't going to endanger any of your neighbors by merely being stored and ignored. You can't say this for nukes.

176 posted on 06/19/2002 5:40:45 PM PDT by sneakypete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson