The President threatened the citizens?

ProV1

Well-known member
Did his presser just inform you that there is no weaponry that you can pocess that would threaten the Federal government? You consider this statement a surprising threat? WTF.
 

I enjoy wrestling

Well-known member
Did his presser just inform you that there is no weaponry that you can pocess that would threaten the Federal government? You consider this statement a surprising threat? WTF.
You missed history class and our founding principles. I like
Theodore Parker, an American preacher and social reformer, declared:

"...There is what I call the American idea...This idea demands, as the proximate organization thereof, a democracy, that is, a government of all the people, by all the people, for all the people; of course, a government after the principles of eternal justice, the unchanging law of God; for shortness' sake, I will call it the idea of Freedom..."
 

ProV1

Well-known member
You missed history class and our founding principles. I like
Theodore Parker, an American preacher and social reformer, declared:

"...There is what I call the American idea...This idea demands, as the proximate organization thereof, a democracy, that is, a government of all the people, by all the people, for all the people; of course, a government after the principles of eternal justice, the unchanging law of God; for shortness' sake, I will call it the idea of Freedom..."
Blah Blah Blah. The point is simple. For the purpose of protecting against government tyranny, the 2nd amendment is useless and has been for a long time.
 

ProV1

Well-known member
Our founding fathers worried about government overreach. The answer was simple imo
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Your militia may need about 1T dollars in weaponry to keep the government in check.
 

John74

Well-known member
What a moron
Yes he is. Almost unbelievable that anyone in an elected position of power in the United States would be so completely arrogant and ignorant to make such a statement.

Beyond the 350-million privately owned firearms in the US, does he think the members of the military and many police forces would just go blindly forward on his orders to murder fellow citizens on our soil? It would be so ugly it’s unfathomable. It would be a huge moral divide that there would be refusal to follow orders and outright mutiny in a large portion of the ranks.
 

ProV1

Well-known member
Yes he is. Almost unbelievable that anyone in an elected position of power in the United States would be so completely arrogant and ignorant to make such a statement.

Beyond the 350-million privately owned firearms in the US, does he think the members of the military and many police forces would just go blindly forward on his orders to murder fellow citizens on our soil? It would be so ugly it’s unfathomable. It would be a huge moral divide that there would be refusal to follow orders and outright mutiny in a large portion of the ranks.
LOL. When did he say he was going to order the military to murder citizens? You nut jobs continue to devolve.
 

John74

Well-known member
LOL. When did he say he was going to order the military to murder citizens? You nut jobs continue to devolve.
He didn’t dummy. He said to take on government, you need F15s and nuclear weapons. You don’t, especially in a free Republic with a volunteer military. You need enough firepower to make it ugly and to turn those volunteer soldiers towards your cause. But hey, keep arguing.
 

ProV1

Well-known member
He didn’t dummy. He said to take on government, you need F15s and nuclear weapons. You don’t, especially in a free Republic with a volunteer military. You need enough firepower to make it ugly and to turn those volunteer soldiers towards your cause. But hey, keep arguing.
He was talking about the 2nd amendment you moron. Per your own argument, it is useless against a tyrannical government. You would need the turn the power of the military against its own government vs use the 2nd amendment to get the job done. He was stating the obvious and you crazies are freaking out.
 
Last edited:

ProV1

Well-known member
It's not my militia, it would be the people's militia. The talk of using real army against it's civilians is absurd. I'm President Biden, don't mess with us. We have F15s and nukes. What a deranged statement. P7ss poor
Well what else would you use against an attack by a well armed militia other than the military?

Besides. He was not talking about using the military for anything. He was commenting on what the militia men would need.
 

Raider6309

Well-known member
Well what else would you use against an attack by a well armed militia other than the military?

Besides. He was not talking about using the military for anything. He was commenting on what the militia men would need.
Basically need a Toyota and an AK47 to hold off the USA military
 

Steel Valley FB

Well-known member
Except he’s wrong on ghe 2nd Amendment prohibiting private citizens from owning cannons. Theres an abundance of documentation that proves citizens legally owned cannons throughout early US history.
 
  • Like
Reactions: y2h

ProV1

Well-known member
Except he’s wrong on ghe 2nd Amendment prohibiting private citizens from owning cannons. Theres an abundance of documentation that proves citizens legally owned cannons throughout early US history.
Ok. Start your arms race with the United States and update us on your progress.
 
.
Top