|
|
|
|
|
by grrowl
4671 days ago
|
|
I continually don't understand this argument. Any group of armed and motivated people intending on taking down the government would be stopped, one way or another, before they can assemble a well-organised militia. The presence of guns might make you safer in a number of narrow scenarios but not against anything as large as a state-wide police force, let alone the US Army. |
|
The militia was intended to be the primary form of military organization.
Fundamentally, an armed citizenry was to be the final check against the abuse of power by the state.