To protect against tyrannyon December 21, 2012 @ 10:08 am (Updated: 10:36 am - 12/21/12 )
Not just any guns, but as you might expect, the very guns the President wants to ban on the grounds that in the wrong hands they are just too deadly.
Now obviously these gun-buyers are not going to shoot up a classroom. But you might ask, why DO they need such weapons?
Well let's think back a few days, when Texas Representative Louie Gohmert answered that very question.
"A free people should be an armed people," said Gohmert. "It insures against the tyranny of the government if they know the biggest army is the American people, then you don't have the tyranny that came from King George."
It's what the founders believed. It's why they insisted on a Second Amendment 225 years ago. But we should at least take a moment to think through what that would mean today.
It would mean that some Americans are arming themselves so that, if necessary, they can fire upon members of the U.S. military. Should our government go rogue, and dispatch blindly obedient soldiers to march through our neighborhoods to round us up, we will ambush them - just as the Taliban would.
That's what I find weird - Americans arming themselves so that if necessary, they can kill the very soldiers that we now thank for their service at every opportunity.
But these soldiers are the sons and daughters that we raised, aren't they? If the order ever went out to round up and enslave the citizenry, wouldn't our sons and daughters say 'hell no' or would we really have to shoot at them?
Jason Rantz says it's the Seattle DOT that's to blame for our awful commutes
Just in time for Halloween, western Washington spider season in full effect
10 reasons we know you're a Seattle driver
Please login below with your Facebook, Twitter, Google+ or Disqus account. Existing MyNorthwest account holders will need to create a new Disqus account or use one of the social logins provided below. Thank you.