Like they banned alcohol with an amendment (XVIII), and then reversed it (XXI)?
The Prohibition Amendments were stupid. But if the US government could not ban alcohol, which is an ingested substance, what make you or anyone think the US government could ban guns, which are weapons and could, in a manner of speaking, fight back?
Likewise, there is no place for that stupid amendment. Period. Nowhere in the preamble of the US constitution does it justify possession of firearms as a right for a human being!
We can say an idea is 'universal' but we can only enforce 'local'. The American people can say that the right to rebellion against a tyrannical government is 'universal', but since different nations have different local beliefs, the laws, ie Second Amendment or background checks or age restriction, must be 'local'.
So I will ask you and everyone else this...
Do you believe that a citizenry have the inherent right to rebel against a government that they deemed to be tyrannical? The government is tyrannical by their own perception, not by external standards, but by the people as they live under that government. Self defense is individual and no one can credibly argue that there is no intrinsic right to self defense. But when we use words like 'the people' or 'citizenry' we moved into the political realm. Those words, especially 'citizenry', are %100 political in context.
So do you believe that a citizenry have the inherent/intrinsic/innate right to rebel against a tyrannical government?
If your answer is 'Yes', then why do you not support your people's version of our Second Amendment? If your answer is 'No', then be satisfy with forever being slaves. The problem with the 'No' answer is that no government ever believe in 'No'. In history, every society that had a slave class worried about slaves not being compliant and obedient, and had provisions to militarily deal with the potential of a rebellion by slaves. One such famous rebellion was Spartacus, remember?
So do you believe that a citizenry have the inherent/intrinsic/innate right to rebel against a tyrannical government?
THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION WHATSOEVER FOR LAY PEOPLE- majority of them - idiots - TO POSSESS/OWN ADVANCED FIREARMS.
There is nothing 'advanced' about the AR-15 or its military equivalent, the M-4, and I shot both. I own a Noveske-built AR-15. Noveske rifles are not cheap but as the old saying go: You get what you paid for.
Which lead up to the next question: What are you willing to pay for the rights and freedoms that Americans said to be 'universal' ?
How are they going to fight a "tyrannical" govt? With AR-15s? Javelins are wrecking havoc for the BTRs and T72s and T90s in Ukraine. And a bunch of rednecks in backwoods are going to fight the Govt with AR-15s??
By such time, the US would be in full civil war. Look at the Vietnam War, for example. Why do you praise the armed Viet Cong guerrilla fighters but not the average Americans who are similarly armed? Rednecks in the backwoods? You been watching too many bad B movies about the US. Of the average Americans, many of them are veterans and some even combat veterans. Twenty millions AR-15s in urban and wild outdoors environment will give the US government pause.
A significant portion of Americans seek the destruction of political authority. What if they succeed?
foreignpolicy.com
The U.S. military isn’t culturally or institutionally designed to be an adequate domestic actor—rather, the opposite. Its role in American life has been specifically designed to make it ineffective in domestic operations. The use of the military would not be, in itself, a constitutional crisis; there are legal precedents and explicit executive orders governing the use of military force on U.S. soil. But any military response to civil unrest is highly likely to spin out of control into extended insurgency. And for all the U.S. military’s prowess, the outcome would be entirely uncertain.
Would a U.S. force on U.S. soil face the same fundamental resistance? American forces would, after all, be American. But the United States is not like other countries. It was born in resistance to government. Its history has been filled with state resistance to federal authority. And it has experienced resistance to occupation by its own forces before.
Of the military, many personnel, perhaps as much as 1/2, will leave the military rather than fight their fellow Americans, and they will leave even before the fighting start. The ideological and political signs of such a civil war will already be evident. So by the time this tyrannical US government is readied to give deployment orders against Americans, possibly 1/2 of the US military will
ALREADY be gone and joined the rebellion.
Haha, you dishonest rednecks.
School shootings should be enough justification to ban civilian usage of firearms. As another Pakistani member said on this forum. Instead of being honest about it that you guys just want to keep guns, when that centuries-old amendment is outdated. lol.
Haha, the funny part is that you don't hear about school shootings like in Saudi Arabia, China or Japan, or in Egypt. lol.
Have China approved your application into their country yet? Surely all your sucking up to them and criticisms of US are enough, no?