The Gipper on Arms

[glockmail]

Of course it is, technically it's sound advice, but what about the moral context?

Using your brains (or in this case, his) to repel an act of an aggressor is not immoral.

[avatar4321]

Best of luck if you give it a try, pretty big military you have there, controlled by the president.

By the time I ever got around to trying it, the "big military" would probably be just as divided and ready to move.

[diuretic]

Knocking off the USSR.

He didn't knock off the USSR, Gorbachev did.

[diuretic]

Facts. Logic.

Opinion.

[diuretic]

Depends on what the issues is. If the guv'mint attempts a direct attack on The Constitution, as in trying to take away our guns, many would fight. As a conventional attack on the military would be out of the question, guerilla tactics would prevail. Even on a one to one ratio the results would be very bad for the military and guv’mint, and they would sustain much more damage than the pacifist public would be able to take. Look at the pressure the pacifists are putting on Bush for 3500 dead soldiers in Iraq. In reality the number of civilian guns would far outweigh the number of military and police.

Okay so if there was an attempt at disarming the American public they'd rise up and overthrow the government using guerilla tactics. So millions of people would leave their jobs to become guerillas and fight and bomb and stab and trap and commit acts of sabotage, all without training. And this would continue for how long?

Would you advocate attacking the government if they attacked any other constitutional rights or is the Second Amendment the only one worth the fight?

[diuretic]

Using your brains (or in this case, his) to repel an act of an aggressor is not immoral.

Actually the brains probably belong to the federal agent who just got a headshot from one of G. Gordon's listeners.

Yes he had to heavily qualify his statement later. But in the context he gave the later, qualified advice it was pretty useless anyway. The ATF agents have Kevlar helmets now. He backed out of that one pretty damn quickly.

[diuretic]

By the time I ever got around to trying it, the "big military" would probably be just as divided and ready to move.

So there's no discipline in the US military, so sense of adherence to orders?

[Joe Steel]

President Reagan is in good company. Because the founders who established the Constitution previously wrote this declaration. They would be in complete agreement.

Sorry, no.

Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence but had nothing to do with the Constitution.

Regardless, the Declaration of Independence is little more than a hack manifesto written to inspire revolution in a population not otherwise interested in it. Consequently, for the first 40 to 50 years of the U. S., no one paid much attention to it. It's not all that important in defining the American political tradition.

[diuretic]

Sorry, no.

Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence but had nothing to do with the Constitution.

Regardless, the Declaration of Independence is little more than a hack manifesto written to inspire revolution in a population not otherwise interested in it. Consequently, for the first 40 to 50 years of the U. S., no one paid much attention to it. It's not all that important in defining the American political tradition.

Bugger - I quite like the language in it.

[Joe Steel]

Bugger - I quite like the language in it.

I have to agree. It's an inspiring piece. Fomenting rebellion, after all was its purpose.

[diuretic]

I have to agree. It's an inspiring piece. Fomenting rebellion, after all was its purpose.

And a necessary rebellion. I know there's a bit of revisionism about King George III and the Brits at that time but I think the early Americans knew one of the great truths about human nature - privilege never gave anything up without a struggle.

[glockmail]

He didn't knock off the USSR, Gorbachev did.

Revisionism.

[glockmail]

Opinion.

The correct one based on the facts and his legacy.

[glockmail]

Okay so if there was an attempt at disarming the American public they'd rise up and overthrow the government using guerilla tactics. So millions of people would leave their jobs to become guerillas and fight and bomb and stab and trap and commit acts of sabotage, all without training. And this would continue for how long?

Would you advocate attacking the government if they attacked any other constitutional rights or is the Second Amendment the only one worth the fight?

It would continue until the Constitution was reinstated.

Depends on what the issue is.

[glockmail]

Actually the brains probably belong to the federal agent who just got a headshot from one of G. Gordon's listeners.

Yes he had to heavily qualify his statement later. But in the context he gave the later, qualified advice it was pretty useless anyway. The ATF agents have Kevlar helmets now. He backed out of that one pretty damn quickly.

The kevlar represents more of a challenge, but not insurmountable.