How would you respond to this:

[PitViper]

.
A person just asked me this question because I support the 2nd amendment for protection against tyranny. He asked:

"if you feel the 2nd amendment is important in protecting you from tyranny, what makes you think personal firearms will do any good against tanks and nuclear weapons?"

Please help me make a calm response, because I feel it is sheer detachment from reality to pose such a question, so I am trying not to insult this person.

Of all elements in War the infantry is the most important...this is posed in such a way as to start an argument.

Thanks for your input

 

[Pericles]

Afghanistan

Vietnam

Northern Ireland

 

[sailingaway]

It isn't only about tyranny, there is also self defense etc, think post Katrina. But each weapon is better in different circumstances. if gangs have weapons in a post big earthquake in L.A. or post flood in LA, you need substantial arms, right there.

Regardless, most mass shootings are in gun control zones, where the shooter knows he'll be able to pile up an impressive body count before anyone can stop them. Violent crime goes down in areas with concealed carry laws.

And regarding tyranny, the more and more varied the better, wouldn't you say?

 

[otherone]

.
"if you feel the 2nd amendment is important in protecting you from tyranny, what makes you think personal firearms will do any good against tanks and nuclear weapons?"

"They'll be more helpful than a naive trust in the government and an air of self-congratulatory superiority will.
The people coming to take your firearms won't be in a tank or using nuclear weapons....IDIOT.
Now go home and tweet why you don't think you are responsible for repaying your student loans"....

 

[Fukthenannystate]

He's trying to get you to confess that ordinary people need tanks and sophisticated weaponry to protect themselves against the government, in which case he can erect the strawman -- does the right to have firearms include weapons grade plutonium? These kinds of Michael Moore tactics don't survive long in real debate. Yet like Pericles said, for the sake of argument, you could always simply point to the many number of historical points where small guerrilla outfits have taken down or stopped entire armies thought to be impossible to vanquish.

 

[PitViper]

I responded like this:
I do feel that the second amendment is very important to guard against Tyranny, however I never alluded to small arms being effective against tanks and nukes... regardless of the key strategic importance of heavy infantry in all forms of conquest throughout time. I would be just as assumptive to pose a question to you suggesting that you believe an unarmed populous is somehow safer against such forms of corruption...

 

[otherone]

The MOST basic human Right is self-preservation...the RIGHT to protect oneself from harm. Without it, NO OTHER Right can exist.

 

[CT4Liberty]

Well - first, as sailingaway mentions, its not JUST about a civil war situation, but also for personal defense.

That said, your question was specific to guns fighting tyranny and this is 2 fold.

1 - Especially at a local level, the potential threat of retribution can help keep individuals from overstepping their authority. Look at the Battle of Athens thread as an example of this. While not perfect or flawless, its better than nothing from keeping tyranny from coming in the first place.

2 - If it actually came to needing to raise arms against the federal government and its nukes and tanks, you ahve to remember this would not be a conventional fight. It wouldnt be the red coats lining up in a field and us lining up in a field firing back and forth. It would be a gorilla insurgency that takes Iraq/Afghanistan to a whole new level. The feds could not use their nukes, because they would be nuking themselves and a bunch of innocent people in the process. It would be the fistful of sand analogy, where the tighter they came down, the more they would lose the hearts/minds of regular people and their own ranks. Would all the military go along with firing on civilians? Would they go along with drone strikes of residential areas? Some would, but a lot wouldnt.

Think about this...

There were an estimated 5000-7000 insurgents in Iraq and they gave the US Military a pretty good run for their money over 10 years. There are 80 million people with guns in the US, if .1% of them are willing to fight for their freedom that means there is 10 times as many insurgents in the US.

The land area of Iraq is 169,000 sq. miles vs. 3.8 million sq. miles of the US. So you have 10 times the number of insurgents, in over 20 times the space.

 

[DamianTV]

You dont need to point a gun at a nuclear warhead, merely the person that gives the order to push the button.

 

[pcosmar]

"what makes you think personal firearms will do any good against tanks and nuclear weapons?"

Keep pushing and you will find out.

 

[Fukthenannystate]

Let's not forget one very key aspect that often gets left out of the debate --- Entertainment. What's wrong with collecting firearms, using them properly and safely, and taking them out to shoot for fun at a range? Me and my brother had hours of fun competing in target rounds when we were younger. Who is the authority that can question how you amuse yourself?

 

[ravedown]

ive heard the same argument and responded: the taliban and al-qaeda have roughly 35,000 members and we're still at war with them in the mountains of afghanistan and pakistan. the NRA alone has over 4 million members.
...next.

 

[Acala]

I just started reading a book called "Total Resistance". It was written by reserve officers in the Swiss military as a guide for guerilla warfare against an invading army. So far it is really good. What they had to say about a nuclear strike was that the ruins left behind give you great places to hide and continue the fight.

But what the person in the OP is really saying is that if freedom comes under attack their strategy is not only to give up immediately and submit to slavery, but to get started NOW with the job of surrendering your arms. Frankly, it is hard for me to not get pretty disgusted with that.

 

[S.Shorland]

The tyranny we fear needs us to produce for the tyrant on his tax farm.Why would a Government destroy its own farm with nuclear weapons?How many tanks are needed to subjugate 300 million people? When they run out of petrol,shoot the service crew.

 

[CaptUSA]

My answer to this:

Me having a few guns? Won't do much good.
A few million of my fellow Americans having a few guns?

 

[TywinLannister]

Tell him the Second Amendment means you also have the right to have tanks and nuclear weapons, and watch his head explode

 

[TywinLannister]

I just started reading a book called "Total Resistance". It was written by reserve officers in the Swiss military as a guide for guerilla warfare against an invading army. So far it is really good. What they had to say about a nuclear strike was that the ruins left behind give you great places to hide and continue the fight.

But what the person in the OP is really saying is that if freedom comes under attack their strategy is not only to give up immediately and submit to slavery, but to get started NOW with the job of surrendering your arms. Frankly, it is hard for me to not get pretty disgusted with that.

I have that book. Pretty cool. Never realized you could derail a train with a sledgehammer.

 

[Fukthenannystate]

That sounds like a good read, I may have to check it out. I'm still working on John Locke's Two Treaties of Government right now.

Anyway, lot of good points. I think if you're buddy is still questioning that guns are necessary, it's probably because he's emotionally invested in the crusade against firearms and doesn't want to hear your arguments for them.

 

[Pericles]

I have that book. Pretty cool. Never realized you could derail a train with a sledgehammer.

You can accomplish much with little, but you can't do something with nothing.

 

[BAllen]

Tell him the Second Amendment means you also have the right to have tanks and nuclear weapons, and watch his head explode

Good answer!