I'm curious as to why gun advocates trust the candidate who says they want to confiscate guns less than the president engaging in authoritarian and corrupt behavior.
The whole point of the right to bear arms is that they're meant to be used against the government when they overstep their bounds. But what happens when the people who bear said arms agrees with how the government is breaking the law?
The whole point of the right to bear arms is that they're meant to be used against the government when they overstep their bounds. But what happens when the people who bear said arms agrees with how the government is breaking the law?