They got sooooo close: NYT almost sees 2A

[dogmush]

I get a daily email newsletter from the NYT because I'm a masochist, and I like seeing what the enemy other side is talking about.  This morning they had an essay on the protests going on in Iran right now over the student that was killed and headscarves.  It's, in general, a decent piece talking about how the new Iranian president has shifted back towards a strict fundamentalist rule after a more reformist Rouhani had eased some of the restrictions on life.  It also talks about how young Iranians are feeling desperate and may look to overthrow the current gov because they see no way out.

After several paragraphs about how the current government is bad (it is) and the young people are looking for change (they are) and how everything is still controlled by extreme clerics, and that a violent overthrow might be the only way for Iranians to get out from under the yoke of a tyrannical national government, they throw this jewel out there:

In the short term, Iran’s government seems likely to prevail. Then again, revolutions are rarely predictable.

David put it this way: “History would suggest that since the state holds all the guns, this isn’t likely to last.

Oh wait, it's easier to get rid of tyrants if the people have the same arms as the government is using against them?  And the people having arms might serve as a defense against this kind of tyranny taking hold?  You don't say, NYT, you don't *expletive deleted*ing say.....

[Ben]

Oh wait, it's easier to get rid of tyrants if the people have the same arms as the government is using against them?  And the people having arms might serve as a defense against this kind of tyranny taking hold?  You don't say, NYT, you don't *expletive deleted*ing say.....

I've been seeing a ton of this talk since the ruskie/uki thing. "We need to take the AR15s from the crazy gun nuts in the US and give them to Ukranian citizens to defend their homes." No irony alerts going off on that side.

[WLJ]

I've been seeing a ton of this talk since the ruskie/uki thing. "We need to take the AR15s from the crazy gun nuts in the US and give them to Ukranian citizens to defend their homes." No irony alerts going off on that side.

But the Russians have nukes and Su-27s

[Perd Hapley]

Why would Iranian revolutionaries need guns? Just put on a Viking helmet, and storm the capitol.

[K Frame]

No, no they didn't come remotely close to seeing the Second Amendment.

They're incapable of seeing something happening elsewhere in the world and extrapolating that back to why it is applicable to the United States.

[dogmush]

No, no they didn't come remotely close to seeing the Second Amendment.

They're incapable of seeing something happening elsewhere in the world and extrapolating that back to why it is applicable to the United States.

Or they actually realize they are the hardline clerics.  But I doubt they have that much introspection.

[Tuco]

But the Russians have nukes and Su-27s

>breaks 4th wall
Ah Ha! He's walked right into my trap!

[MechAg94]

I've been seeing a ton of this talk since the ruskie/uki thing. "We need to take the AR15s from the crazy gun nuts in the US and give them to Ukranian citizens to defend their homes." No irony alerts going off on that side.

Gun Talk Radio mentioned donating guns at one point, but the audience was split on it.  Soon after, the FedGov was sending all sorts of money and aide so the idea went away. 

[Pb]

Leftists are frequently pro-gun when they have no power.

Once they have governmental power, they become virulently anti-gun for anyone but the government.

The left controls the American government, hence their hatred of private gun ownership.

[K Frame]

Recently George Takai, posted to his feed something to the effect of "If the Ukranians only had some of America's 20 million assault weapons."

Someone anchored him with "Thanks for recognizing the importance of the Second Amendment."

Of course Mr. OH MYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! had no response to that, and probably couldn't even begin to conceive the meaning of it.

[Pb]

I wanted to share something I read on one of the forums- a thought experiment you can use when discussing gun control.

Ask the other person:

"Consider the most evil American politician you know, and don't tell me who it is."

Pause for thought... yeah they are probably thinking Trump.

"Imagine this man is President of the USA, and his faction has control of Congress and the Supreme Court.  Imagine he has a large amount of popularity among the public."

Pause for thought.

"Would you like the government of this man to control all the guns in the USA?"

If they answer that they are fine with it, the conversation is over, because they are hopeless.

If they say no, well, tell them they understand the purpose of the Second Amendment.  You can then talk about how gun registration, licensing, bans of military rifles etc make tyranny possible.

[WLJ]

"Consider the most evil American politician you know, and don't tell me who it is."
Pause for thought... yeah they are probably thinking Trump.

Doubt there would be a pause and any thought required with some folks. It's basically akin to a knee jerk reaction with them now