OT -- Right to Bear Arms -- Opinions Please

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

One other thing sooner. Here are some reasons why "educated people" are "undervalued."

Mao Zedong, Josef Stalin, Karl Marx, Martin Heiddeger, Vladimir Lenin, Dr, Josef Mengele, Noam Chomsky, Hideki Tojo, Robespierre, Pol Pot, Dr. William Shockley etc.

Need I go on? Being educated does not innoculate one from moral flaws nor create wisdom or goodness. It just means obtaining knowledge. What one DOES with that is what counts.

You just proved one of my statements tonight. "Knowledge is power but ignorance will be our undoing."
Just look at Stalin. He was a crazy smart man but his population was full of the uneducated.

Yeah but those aren't the ones who fomented or drove the revolution were they? Hell the farmers in Siberia heard about it a year later. The Revolution took place is St. Petersburg, the most educated and wealthiest of the Russian Cities at thaT TIME.

But are you not proving my point in part by saying that the educated started the first of the series of revolutions in Russia? Besides also Stalin took out the educated by closing down the colleges and also killing damn near all the educated elite in the country. He wanted the population dumb so he can rule without any questions or any challenges.

I have to be misreading you. You seem to be arguing the Russian Revolutions culminating in the massacreing of the Royal Family, Bolshevism and the 50+ million people it killed were a good thing.

Hell no. LOL I was just pointing out the fact that the educated people started that revolution. Besides the killing of the royal family might have been good for that country if Lenin had not been able to take control.

Reason 2,612 for being skeptical of educated people, right?

As for the murder of the royal family potentially being a good thing? Josef Stalin would be proud of your attitude.

LMAO. It could have turned out better. It did in France.
Oh and France is a perfect example of an educated upper class of people who started a great revolution.

REALLY???????????? You think the Terror (which led to 30,000 executions), the rise of Napoleon and the subsequent pan-European Wars which led to millions of French dead (among others), the giving up of massive lands in the USA were something to be proud of? WOW!!!!!!!!

Yes for the same reasons you would say the American Civil War was good.

That is a terrifyingly inept comparison.

1. Number of citizens summarily executed by gov't. French-30,000+, USA none
2. Form of gov't in existence when all was said and done-French-Dictatorship followed by monarchy. USA-Republic
3. Number of neighboring countries invaded as a direct result of revolution/civil war-French-AT LEAST six. USA-None
4. National Moral Standing. France-Worsened due to all the above. USA- enhanced by destruction of slavery

The French revolution was such a craptastic failure it marked the end of the Enlightenment.

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

One other thing sooner. Here are some reasons why "educated people" are "undervalued."

Mao Zedong, Josef Stalin, Karl Marx, Martin Heiddeger, Vladimir Lenin, Dr, Josef Mengele, Noam Chomsky, Hideki Tojo, Robespierre, Pol Pot, Dr. William Shockley etc.

Need I go on? Being educated does not innoculate one from moral flaws nor create wisdom or goodness. It just means obtaining knowledge. What one DOES with that is what counts.

You just proved one of my statements tonight. "Knowledge is power but ignorance will be our undoing."
Just look at Stalin. He was a crazy smart man but his population was full of the uneducated.

Yeah but those aren't the ones who fomented or drove the revolution were they? Hell the farmers in Siberia heard about it a year later. The Revolution took place is St. Petersburg, the most educated and wealthiest of the Russian Cities at thaT TIME.

But are you not proving my point in part by saying that the educated started the first of the series of revolutions in Russia? Besides also Stalin took out the educated by closing down the colleges and also killing damn near all the educated elite in the country. He wanted the population dumb so he can rule without any questions or any challenges.

I have to be misreading you. You seem to be arguing the Russian Revolutions culminating in the massacreing of the Royal Family, Bolshevism and the 50+ million people it killed were a good thing.

Hell no. LOL I was just pointing out the fact that the educated people started that revolution. Besides the killing of the royal family might have been good for that country if Lenin had not been able to take control.

Reason 2,612 for being skeptical of educated people, right?

As for the murder of the royal family potentially being a good thing? Josef Stalin would be proud of your attitude.

LMAO. It could have turned out better. It did in France.
Oh and France is a perfect example of an educated upper class of people who started a great revolution.

REALLY???????????? You think the Terror (which led to 30,000 executions), the rise of Napoleon and the subsequent pan-European Wars which led to millions of French dead (among others), the giving up of massive lands in the USA were something to be proud of? WOW!!!!!!!!

Yes for the same reasons you would say the American Civil War was good.

That is a terrifyingly inept comparison.

1. Number of citizens summarily executed by gov't. French-30,000+, USA none
2. Form of gov't in existence when all was said and done-French-Dictatorship followed by monarchy. USA-Republic
3. Number of neighboring countries invaded as a direct result of revolution/civil war-French-AT LEAST six. USA-None
4. National Moral Standing. France-Worsened due to all the above. USA- enhanced by destruction of slavery

The French revolution was such a craptastic failure it marked the end of the Enlightenment.

Problem with you comparing the US revolution with the French revolution is that the American revolution was not a true revolution. A true revolution eats itself.
And how is my comparison inept? Its the same thing. A lot of people died in a battle of classes. Both ended up improving the structures of their governments. Its hard to say France worsened and the US enhanced. France gained a democracy. The US destroyed the south lost many many people and had to go through reconstruction.

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

One other thing sooner. Here are some reasons why "educated people" are "undervalued."

Mao Zedong, Josef Stalin, Karl Marx, Martin Heiddeger, Vladimir Lenin, Dr, Josef Mengele, Noam Chomsky, Hideki Tojo, Robespierre, Pol Pot, Dr. William Shockley etc.

Need I go on? Being educated does not innoculate one from moral flaws nor create wisdom or goodness. It just means obtaining knowledge. What one DOES with that is what counts.

You just proved one of my statements tonight. "Knowledge is power but ignorance will be our undoing."
Just look at Stalin. He was a crazy smart man but his population was full of the uneducated.

Yeah but those aren't the ones who fomented or drove the revolution were they? Hell the farmers in Siberia heard about it a year later. The Revolution took place is St. Petersburg, the most educated and wealthiest of the Russian Cities at thaT TIME.

But are you not proving my point in part by saying that the educated started the first of the series of revolutions in Russia? Besides also Stalin took out the educated by closing down the colleges and also killing damn near all the educated elite in the country. He wanted the population dumb so he can rule without any questions or any challenges.

I have to be misreading you. You seem to be arguing the Russian Revolutions culminating in the massacreing of the Royal Family, Bolshevism and the 50+ million people it killed were a good thing.

Hell no. LOL I was just pointing out the fact that the educated people started that revolution. Besides the killing of the royal family might have been good for that country if Lenin had not been able to take control.

Reason 2,612 for being skeptical of educated people, right?

As for the murder of the royal family potentially being a good thing? Josef Stalin would be proud of your attitude.

LMAO. It could have turned out better. It did in France.
Oh and France is a perfect example of an educated upper class of people who started a great revolution.

REALLY???????????? You think the Terror (which led to 30,000 executions), the rise of Napoleon and the subsequent pan-European Wars which led to millions of French dead (among others), the giving up of massive lands in the USA were something to be proud of? WOW!!!!!!!!

Yes for the same reasons you would say the American Civil War was good.

That is a terrifyingly inept comparison.

1. Number of citizens summarily executed by gov't. French-30,000+, USA none
2. Form of gov't in existence when all was said and done-French-Dictatorship followed by monarchy. USA-Republic
3. Number of neighboring countries invaded as a direct result of revolution/civil war-French-AT LEAST six. USA-None
4. National Moral Standing. France-Worsened due to all the above. USA- enhanced by destruction of slavery

The French revolution was such a craptastic failure it marked the end of the Enlightenment.

Problem with you comparing the US revolution with the French revolution is that the American revolution was not a true revolution. A true revolution eats itself.
And how is my comparison inept? Its the same thing. A lot of people died in a battle of classes. Both ended up improving the structures of their governments. Its hard to say France worsened and the US enhanced. France gained a democracy. The US destroyed the south lost many many people and had to go through reconstruction.

WTF are you TALKING about?????? YOU compared the US Civil War with the French Revolution. More WTF are you talking about. France did NOT gain a Democracy. I gained a Napoleonic Dictatorship followed by a return to a Monarchy.

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

One other thing sooner. Here are some reasons why "educated people" are "undervalued."

Mao Zedong, Josef Stalin, Karl Marx, Martin Heiddeger, Vladimir Lenin, Dr, Josef Mengele, Noam Chomsky, Hideki Tojo, Robespierre, Pol Pot, Dr. William Shockley etc.

Need I go on? Being educated does not innoculate one from moral flaws nor create wisdom or goodness. It just means obtaining knowledge. What one DOES with that is what counts.

You just proved one of my statements tonight. "Knowledge is power but ignorance will be our undoing."
Just look at Stalin. He was a crazy smart man but his population was full of the uneducated.

Yeah but those aren't the ones who fomented or drove the revolution were they? Hell the farmers in Siberia heard about it a year later. The Revolution took place is St. Petersburg, the most educated and wealthiest of the Russian Cities at thaT TIME.

But are you not proving my point in part by saying that the educated started the first of the series of revolutions in Russia? Besides also Stalin took out the educated by closing down the colleges and also killing damn near all the educated elite in the country. He wanted the population dumb so he can rule without any questions or any challenges.

I have to be misreading you. You seem to be arguing the Russian Revolutions culminating in the massacreing of the Royal Family, Bolshevism and the 50+ million people it killed were a good thing.

Hell no. LOL I was just pointing out the fact that the educated people started that revolution. Besides the killing of the royal family might have been good for that country if Lenin had not been able to take control.

Reason 2,612 for being skeptical of educated people, right?

As for the murder of the royal family potentially being a good thing? Josef Stalin would be proud of your attitude.

LMAO. It could have turned out better. It did in France.
Oh and France is a perfect example of an educated upper class of people who started a great revolution.

REALLY???????????? You think the Terror (which led to 30,000 executions), the rise of Napoleon and the subsequent pan-European Wars which led to millions of French dead (among others), the giving up of massive lands in the USA were something to be proud of? WOW!!!!!!!!

Yes for the same reasons you would say the American Civil War was good.

That is a terrifyingly inept comparison.

1. Number of citizens summarily executed by gov't. French-30,000+, USA none
2. Form of gov't in existence when all was said and done-French-Dictatorship followed by monarchy. USA-Republic
3. Number of neighboring countries invaded as a direct result of revolution/civil war-French-AT LEAST six. USA-None
4. National Moral Standing. France-Worsened due to all the above. USA- enhanced by destruction of slavery

The French revolution was such a craptastic failure it marked the end of the Enlightenment.

Problem with you comparing the US revolution with the French revolution is that the American revolution was not a true revolution. A true revolution eats itself.
And how is my comparison inept? Its the same thing. A lot of people died in a battle of classes. Both ended up improving the structures of their governments. Its hard to say France worsened and the US enhanced. France gained a democracy. The US destroyed the south lost many many people and had to go through reconstruction.

WTF are you TALKING about?????? YOU compared the US Civil War with the French Revolution. More WTF are you talking about. France did NOT gain a Democracy. I gained a Napoleonic Dictatorship followed by a return to a Monarchy.

Ok then you confused me. I thought you were comparing both the American Revolutian and adding in the US civil war to the French Revolution. Your number 2 is what threw me off.

BTW how in the hell did we end up talking about this?

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

One other thing sooner. Here are some reasons why "educated people" are "undervalued."

Mao Zedong, Josef Stalin, Karl Marx, Martin Heiddeger, Vladimir Lenin, Dr, Josef Mengele, Noam Chomsky, Hideki Tojo, Robespierre, Pol Pot, Dr. William Shockley etc.

Need I go on? Being educated does not innoculate one from moral flaws nor create wisdom or goodness. It just means obtaining knowledge. What one DOES with that is what counts.

You just proved one of my statements tonight. "Knowledge is power but ignorance will be our undoing."
Just look at Stalin. He was a crazy smart man but his population was full of the uneducated.

Yeah but those aren't the ones who fomented or drove the revolution were they? Hell the farmers in Siberia heard about it a year later. The Revolution took place is St. Petersburg, the most educated and wealthiest of the Russian Cities at thaT TIME.

But are you not proving my point in part by saying that the educated started the first of the series of revolutions in Russia? Besides also Stalin took out the educated by closing down the colleges and also killing damn near all the educated elite in the country. He wanted the population dumb so he can rule without any questions or any challenges.

I have to be misreading you. You seem to be arguing the Russian Revolutions culminating in the massacreing of the Royal Family, Bolshevism and the 50+ million people it killed were a good thing.

Hell no. LOL I was just pointing out the fact that the educated people started that revolution. Besides the killing of the royal family might have been good for that country if Lenin had not been able to take control.

Reason 2,612 for being skeptical of educated people, right?

As for the murder of the royal family potentially being a good thing? Josef Stalin would be proud of your attitude.

LMAO. It could have turned out better. It did in France.
Oh and France is a perfect example of an educated upper class of people who started a great revolution.

REALLY???????????? You think the Terror (which led to 30,000 executions), the rise of Napoleon and the subsequent pan-European Wars which led to millions of French dead (among others), the giving up of massive lands in the USA were something to be proud of? WOW!!!!!!!!

Yes for the same reasons you would say the American Civil War was good.

That is a terrifyingly inept comparison.

1. Number of citizens summarily executed by gov't. French-30,000+, USA none
2. Form of gov't in existence when all was said and done-French-Dictatorship followed by monarchy. USA-Republic
3. Number of neighboring countries invaded as a direct result of revolution/civil war-French-AT LEAST six. USA-None
4. National Moral Standing. France-Worsened due to all the above. USA- enhanced by destruction of slavery

The French revolution was such a craptastic failure it marked the end of the Enlightenment.

Problem with you comparing the US revolution with the French revolution is that the American revolution was not a true revolution. A true revolution eats itself.
And how is my comparison inept? Its the same thing. A lot of people died in a battle of classes. Both ended up improving the structures of their governments. Its hard to say France worsened and the US enhanced. France gained a democracy. The US destroyed the south lost many many people and had to go through reconstruction.

WTF are you TALKING about?????? YOU compared the US Civil War with the French Revolution. More WTF are you talking about. France did NOT gain a Democracy. I gained a Napoleonic Dictatorship followed by a return to a Monarchy.

Ok then you confused me. I thought you were comparing both the American Revolutian and adding in the US civil war to the French Revolution. Your number 2 is what threw me off.

BTW how in the hell did we end up talking about this?

LOL, NO idea. But somehow Marcel Cerdan seems like the next logical tangent!

LMAO, I love talking history with people who actually know it. In college I studied mainly world history. I took some US history but I liked French, Russian and China's history the best.

maui is making a great arguement

Cu Bua wrote:

maui is making a great arguement

He should he has 30 years of learning on my ass. This is why people should respect their elders.

soonermark890 wrote:

Cu Bua wrote:

maui is making a great arguement

He should he has 30 years of learning on my ass. This is why people should respect their elders.

You're KILLING me! I'm 47!

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Cu Bua wrote:

maui is making a great arguement

He should he has 30 years of learning on my ass. This is why people should respect their elders.

You're KILLING me! I'm 47!

LMAO I was wondering how long it was going to take you old man.

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Cu Bua wrote:

maui is making a great arguement

He should he has 30 years of learning on my ass. This is why people should respect their elders.

You're KILLING me! I'm 47!

LMAO I was wondering how long it was going to take you old man.

I am nothing if not predictable!

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Cu Bua wrote:

maui is making a great arguement

He should he has 30 years of learning on my ass. This is why people should respect their elders.

You're KILLING me! I'm 47!

LMAO I was wondering how long it was going to take you old man.

I am nothing if not predictable!

Either way you have 20 years on me. Thats 20 years more reading than I have. I dont stand a chance but hey I try.

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Cu Bua wrote:

maui is making a great arguement

He should he has 30 years of learning on my ass. This is why people should respect their elders.

You're KILLING me! I'm 47!

LMAO I was wondering how long it was going to take you old man.

I am nothing if not predictable!

Either way you have 20 years on me. Thats 20 years more reading than I have. I dont stand a chance but hey I try.

I don't think there is any way around that. You know a lot more than I did at 27 and you argue compellingly. Only piece of advice I can offer is not to be afraid of saying "I don't know." It's a great incentive to go find new books and new answers.

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Cu Bua wrote:

maui is making a great arguement

He should he has 30 years of learning on my ass. This is why people should respect their elders.

You're KILLING me! I'm 47!

LMAO I was wondering how long it was going to take you old man.

I am nothing if not predictable!

Either way you have 20 years on me. Thats 20 years more reading than I have. I dont stand a chance but hey I try.

I don't think there is any way around that. You know a lot more than I did at 27 and you argue compellingly. Only piece of advice I can offer is not to be afraid of saying "I don't know." It's a great incentive to go find new books and new answers.

Whats funny about that is that in my classroom I constantly tell the kids I dont know. Anything that I dont know about I do not fake it. But really on here most of the time I am either just giving you guys shit or I do know.

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Cu Bua wrote:

maui is making a great arguement

He should he has 30 years of learning on my ass. This is why people should respect their elders.

You're KILLING me! I'm 47!

LMAO I was wondering how long it was going to take you old man.

I am nothing if not predictable!

Either way you have 20 years on me. Thats 20 years more reading than I have. I dont stand a chance but hey I try.

I don't think there is any way around that. You know a lot more than I did at 27 and you argue compellingly. Only piece of advice I can offer is not to be afraid of saying "I don't know." It's a great incentive to go find new books and new answers.

Whats funny about that is that in my classroom I constantly tell the kids I dont know. Anything that I dont know about I do not fake it. But really on here most of the time I am either just giving you guys shit or I do know.

Good for you. ego and pride hinder learning. Humility helps it.

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

soonermark890 wrote:

Cu Bua wrote:

maui is making a great arguement

He should he has 30 years of learning on my ass. This is why people should respect their elders.

You're KILLING me! I'm 47!

LMAO I was wondering how long it was going to take you old man.

I am nothing if not predictable!

Either way you have 20 years on me. Thats 20 years more reading than I have. I dont stand a chance but hey I try.

I don't think there is any way around that. You know a lot more than I did at 27 and you argue compellingly. Only piece of advice I can offer is not to be afraid of saying "I don't know." It's a great incentive to go find new books and new answers.

Whats funny about that is that in my classroom I constantly tell the kids I dont know. Anything that I dont know about I do not fake it. But really on here most of the time I am either just giving you guys shit or I do know.

Good for you. ego and pride hinder learning. Humility helps it.

They see right through Bull Shit. We just had a first year teacher that kept trying that shit and now he no longer teaches. I tried to help him and show him its ok to not know everything but he just BS'd the kids. It just doesnt fly.

1)u guys don't need to quote every post, just respond.

2)"the pen is mightier then the sword." I think the 1st amendment protects the other rights every bit as much, if not more then the 2nd.

3)I'm reading through an argument which seems to suggest that an educated society is prone to disastrous results, yet in most of those examples, that same educated society is also an armed society. And it is without argument that certain armed civilians have caused extreme damage to their respective societies.

captain organic wrote:

1)u guys don't need to quote every post, just respond.

2)"the pen is mightier then the sword." I think the 1st amendment protects the other rights every bit as much, if not more then the 2nd.

3)I'm reading through an argument which seems to suggest that an educated society is prone to disastrous results, yet in most of those examples, that same educated society is also an armed society. And it is without argument that certain armed civilians have caused extreme damage to their respective societies.

And without guns your remedy when someone takes away the first amendment is what exactly??????????

Nope, the argument does NOT suggest an educated society is prone to disastrous results. It argues that believing education necessarily leads to wisdom or goodness leads to disastrous results.

marbleheadmaui wrote:

captain organic wrote:

1)u guys don't need to quote every post, just respond.

2)"the pen is mightier then the sword." I think the 1st amendment protects the other rights every bit as much, if not more then the 2nd.

3)I'm reading through an argument which seems to suggest that an educated society is prone to disastrous results, yet in most of those examples, that same educated society is also an armed society. And it is without argument that certain armed civilians have caused extreme damage to their respective societies.

And without guns your remedy when someone takes away the first amendment is what exactly??????????

Nope, the argument does NOT suggest an educated society is prone to disastrous results. It argues that believing education necessarily leads to wisdom or goodness leads to disastrous results.

yet we have seen numerous instances where the 1st amendment has been infringed upon, yet it was not guns that remedied the situation.

captain organic wrote:

marbleheadmaui wrote:

captain organic wrote:

1)u guys don't need to quote every post, just respond.

2)"the pen is mightier then the sword." I think the 1st amendment protects the other rights every bit as much, if not more then the 2nd.

3)I'm reading through an argument which seems to suggest that an educated society is prone to disastrous results, yet in most of those examples, that same educated society is also an armed society. And it is without argument that certain armed civilians have caused extreme damage to their respective societies.

And without guns your remedy when someone takes away the first amendment is what exactly??????????

Nope, the argument does NOT suggest an educated society is prone to disastrous results. It argues that believing education necessarily leads to wisdom or goodness leads to disastrous results.

yet we have seen numerous instances where the 1st amendment has been infringed upon, yet it was not guns that remedied the situation.

Let me try it this way.

1) What prevents politicians not dedicated to the Constitution from taking the first amendment away?

2) Were that to happen in a disarmed society, exactly what remedy would exist? Speaking loudly????

So as to not interrupt my train of thought or be influenced by outside voices (or words) I will leave everybody else answers unread until I post.

First off I do not believe in democracy, for I have never lived in a democracy or heard of one that was sustainable. I live in a Republic.

Secondly, the Right to Bear Arms is essential in many facets of our society, that slow thinking progressives and concrete laden conservatives do not fully understand, however our forefather's did.

1. They, our forefather's, existed at the very beginning of the age of enlightenment, in fact many of them too were the founders of it. They knew no matter how hard they made it to destroy what was built through the constitution, there would need to be true defenders of the constitution. The reason being that there is always people who want to control other people. This made it necessary to include a fail-safe mechanism, an armed society.
The closest we have ever come to a Monarchy was after the Revolutionary War, when it was thought that they would make George Washington, King of the America's. Because of his foresight and very strong beliefs, he not only declined such an offering, but told certain members of the Constitutional constructors, mainly James Madison, that if a monarchy was proposed regardless of his acceptance, he would himself raise an army and start all over.
This fail-safe has kept our government and other governments in check for over 200 years. Over the last 40 years, progressives have attempted to skew the perception of guns in society, as well as postulate the exact wording of the 2nd amendment.

2. Name me one country that could actually invade this country and win a war against our populace, that wouldn't be at best a pyrrhic victory? If China could somehow muster its' entire military and get them a solid starting point in the U.S. they would get the shit kicked out of them. In fact, even if we gave them the entire west coast as a starting point, I don't think they could handle the losses they would incur trying to cross the Rockies. Even with them and India as full blown partners do I see them getting within sight of the Mississippi River. We are to mobile, to well armed, and to independent minded to be defeated. With the exceptions of the hand of God or nuclear weapons, we are currently an invincible nation, because our citizens too have the ability to fight back and therefore vanquish any enemy who steps on our property.

What kind of guns do you guys have?

Let me just mention 2. A .357 S/W which is SWEET!!! And a .22 Ruger pistol. I have several weapons, including guns but I have hidden most of them. Too many laws created by control freaks.

Got a Beretta Px4 Storm 9 last year, love this piece.
Some old Rem .22 rifle and an old Moss 12 gauge.

GDP, how is that Baretta? I have heard mixed reviews from some friends.