How many people are you willing to kill

Cops confiscate guns all the time. They are not required to go to to everyone on a street at once. You would never know when they will show up. In Nevada they tried that fight back approach. One guy killed and the bundys went to jail for 2 year

 

For the sake of hypothetical discussion, let us say such a position actually has support on the part of myself, and that such a course of action is deemed justified to engage in.

For the sake of hypothetical discussion, the number that would be killed would be as many as ultimately proves necessary, up to and including the entire population of the united states. The rest of the world would be far better off as a result.

 

Does that, in your opinion, also apply to gun control?

 

They went to jail while they awaited trial. The trial found that they did not act unlawfully.

The context of the discussion is door-to-door confiscation in an atmosphere where the Second Amendment has been infringed and guns are being unlawfully confiscated en masse. Seizing guns in a piecemeal fashion from prohibited persons here and there, while arguably unconstitutional, will never succeed in disarming enough people to change the dynamic of an armed citizenry and does not set off the social alarms that cause mass resistance. Which, of course, is why they can get away with it.

 

I see what you did there

 

Then you are in the same arena as every other mass murderer.

 

Murder has a definition, look it up.

 

Impotent rage is so sweet.

 

That's because they're universally pathetically weak people.

 

Why? I said I am not antigun.

 

Simple consistancy test ...which has gone unanswered.

 

Just anti citizen and personal liberty

 

Of course. I however think banning some categories of gun is as legal as banning citizens having ICBMs.

 

Clearly you are.

If you were, you'd realize that the government has no authority to confiscate firearms from the law abiding, both by the Constitution and by SCOTUS rulings affirming that right.

Any government who DOES is violating the law. Not the gun owner.

Ironically, you even owned yourself on it when you said "you'd check the Constitution" when it came to legalizing slavery again.

 

Which categories of guns, and are you familiar with the decisions in Miller, Heller, McDonald and Caetano?

 

What is your constitutional basis for that beleif? And what is your reasoning for that equation?

 

SCOTUS disagrees.

 

One, practical observation. NO citizen owns an ICBM.

 

How can you be so certain? Citizens have built their own, very large rockets.

 

Why not, we paid for the one's we have.

 

several things:
-you don't know that
-assuming its because of laws is a fallacy
-that doesnt explain why you think certain types of firearms should be treated as nukes

That is not a practical observation.

 

When the law is unconstitutional and tyrannical it is the duty of the citizenry to fight and to fight violently against those who would seek to strip them of their rights and freedoms. The criminals are those who support unconstitutional laws action and the corrupt agents who seek to enforce them.

 

But you know I wouldn't!

 

Hell our military has been fighting in Afganistan for 17 plus years and can't disarm the unruly. How the hell do you think they can disarm the U.S.? Because it WILL be necessary to order the military to disarm us. The local police can't do it. The people win! It aint happening.

 

1) ICBMs have never been offered to American citizens for private sale
2) ICBM ownership does not advance a right of self defense
3)ICBMs are not weapons that citizens can keep and BEAR
4) the ownership and use of ICBMs have clear interstate and international ramifications