Biden mocked gun-rights advocates who say they need assault weapons to fight the government:

Source
President Joe Biden joked that people who think they needed guns to take on the US government would actually need nuclear weapons.

In a speech outlining his plan to combat gun violence on Wednesday, Biden said: "If you wanted or if you think you need to have weapons to take on the government, you need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons."


So the Taliban and Vietnam surely had nukes and F-15's to win against the federal government, oy vey! This is what is scary that this man honestly has NO concept of what the second amendment stands for. This is why the left find it so easy to take civil liberties away because they honestly think large government is always the answer!

 

Having guns worked Jan 5th didn’t it?

 

Exactly how many shots were fired from rioters on Jan 6th? I'm assuming you meant the 6th.

 

I have said this as well, you would need heavy weapons at the least, guns wont stop a tank or armored vehicle. The Afgan's and VC had them, also the VC had the backing of the north. Afgan's had anti-air against the Russians provided by the US.

 

Second Amendment


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.

...

Not being able to have nukes is an infringement.

 

There is no restrictions to owning a tank or jet fighter in the United States. And least not forget, the French armed the American's during the revolutionary war.

 

I haven't seen any 2A people who bought into the Big Lie do anything about election being stolen. If you're gonna justify the existence of 2A, that would be the time, wouldn't it?

2A is useless against your own government. That's not to say owning guns does not have its purpose, but taking on your own government isn't realistic.

 

Agreed, Im not an expert but I am sure there is a law on their capabilities which is all that matters. What good is a jet fighter or tank if its weapons systems don't exist or are disabled. You can have a helicopter as well, you cant have an apache loaded with all its weapons and armaments.

 

My point exactly

And if you have let it get that far you have already lost

 

You do realize that is exactly how we became an independent country. We took on the crown and won and is EXACTLY why the founders ensured the second amendment was entrenched in our bill of rights.

 

Yes I know, but that was guns and cannon's. Gun's mattered back then, you have to have heavy weapons and heavy vehicles now. Lots of restrictions on weapons that can disable armored vehicles, off limits for the most part.

 

Also they made the 2A and it says arms. Why cant you have a TOW missile system? Its just arms technically, nothing says guns it says arms. Sure you have the rights guaranteed? MANPAD is arms, cant have it. Like you stated Tank with the ability to fire rounds and access to rounds, just "arms" but you cant have it.

 

Biden implied he would use nukes and F-15s on citizens. Whoever writes his speeches is an idiot.

 

Explosives require strict storage protocols. Arms that soldiers carry on the other hand are considered small arms. This is universally accepted. The usual hysteria about owning nukes is simply ignorant.

 

Both the Taliban and the Vietnamese had to reduce themselves to guerilla warfare in order to keep US troops at bay.

Go ahead and try to overthrow the US govt with your weapons, I double dog dare you

 

It is retarded to say but true, and if you take arms against the government you lose a lot rights as a "citizen" which I think is what he is implying. Or if you use "guns" lol, they will respond with tanks ect.

 

Look at the number of officers and enlisted men in the US military who went with the South during the Civil War, granted the bulk were native Southerners and people back then identified more with their state than the nebulous concept of American. As long as we have elections in this country talk of a civil war is a bit over blown. I'll start to be suspicious if there is a move to change the military's Oath of Allegiance from "...I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States...." to ".....Government (or add a presidents name)....". You need an army for a dictatorship too.

 

The military has a poor record against gorilla warfare.

 

Yep they sure did, we threw in the towel in 'Nam and preparing to do the same in Afghanistan...the point of asymmetrical warfare is to slowly bleed and demoralize the superior forces....looks like it works, huh? Particularly if a large part of the population supports the guerillas aims.

 

Ordering American soldiers to kill Americans and destroy each others families and city/states is something they may not do either..

 

It takes profound levels of gullibility to consume this nonsense. At least there was mention of those pulling the trigger and a willingness to focus on the true source of violence; human behavior.

 

Doesn't cover WMD, I believe that may be a defining point, well minus the ridiculous left wing spin

 

It was such a big deal people cant even get the date right

 

Tell the moron and the morons pulling his strings to rid the ghetto folk of their weapons as assurance is can be done and controlled.

Did I mention he is a moron?

 

Yeah, you'd think with something they compare to the fall of Rome they could at least keep the day straight.