Gun Control Question

Hey Sup Forums..

I am having a hard time trying to counter this argument with some people at work.

If they reason that citizens have the right to bear arms is to fight against tyranny, how do we address the fact that we live in a global economy.

Many countries depend on America for their financial needs, (goods, trade, market strength). So if our government ever did become hostile to its populace and start to go into disarray would other countries idly stand by and watch?

Because we live in such an interconnected world, wouldn't other countries intervene to stop a tyrannical American government? They would be acting to save lives but also in their interest as well.

So Sup Forums what do you think? The second amendment gives us the right to bear arms as a "check" to the government, but can't other countries (Nato, allies) act as a power check as well?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>Depending on other people to save you

Why am I not surprised a leftist would argue this?

Bump

This.

Also, the moment a civil war broke out here we'd be infiltrated by numerous countries all vying for power. Think Crimea, but reversed.

No.

>As well
^Therein lies the kicker.
If the government went full dictoatorship, other countries, probably Russia and China, would swoop right the fuck in and "liberate" us. In all likelihood, they would use that as leverage to wrangle concessions partial to trade out of the next government, but in the interim, I have no doubt they would make every attempt to disarm the American populace, and that would probably start another war right there.

>The second amendment gives us the right to
No, it doesn't, it protects a natural right you were born with.

>betting your family's lives on your interests aligning with those of countries vying to fill a power void

I'll keep my guns, thanks.

Yes other countries would stand idly by and watch. The United States's military is strong enough, that those foreign cucks wouldn't do a thing to help the citizens here.

Look at how badly North Korea treats it's citizens, only thing that I done is sanctions.

Look at how badly China crushed the Tiananmen square uprising, no other country did a thing to help the students there, and China is a huge trading partner to many countries.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989

So if I am reading you correctly, you are for gun control and think someone else will come save your hide from an oppressive government, reality check kid, they won't, you are completely wrong, and your coworkers are correct.

Nato country just had a coup

Nothing fucking happened.

And liberal niggers want to argue how people will swoop in to assist the overthrow a tyranical dictatorship?

Other nations would only try to take control for themselves.
Our guns help to prevent that too.

1)The other countries might work with them.
2)Assume the people don't do anything. what chances does eurofags have to stop the us when they have military bases all over. Military and police are less likely to side with the government if people did raise up arms against the government since after all "the people" would include their own family.

You have the strongest military in the entire world. A foreign campaign to "liberate" you would actually consolidate the government's power even further by providing a tangible enemy of the people.

>Because we live in such an interconnected world, wouldn't other countries intervene to stop a tyrannical American government? They would be acting to save lives but also in their interest as well.
You mean like we do with chinese slaves?

Other countries don't necessarily want the will of the American people. They have their own interests.

HAHAHA oh god no

Every country would fucking jump on the opportunity to take down a tyrannical USA.

Also, tell these dumb fucks that "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" means SHALL. NOT. BE. INFRINGED.

HOLD ON HANZ LEME AXE YOU A QUESTION

HOW SHARIA ARE U BRUH

ALLUAH SNACKBAR

The second amendment is to create a citizen army making it impossible to be invaded by a foreign country. The second amendment is about the defense of the nation and having and independent fighting force

Only a fucking moron would ever count on a benevolent government. Politicians are demons, always looking to steal more power, rights, and property for themselves, and avoid being killed for it. They are all the same. Lying, thieving, murderous trash. Those who are most opposed to citizens owning guns are those who deserve to be shot.

constitution doesn't give rights(god or universe does)
constitution guarantees government will protect those rights.
there is no "global society",there are just individuals.7billion or so.
There is no such thing as a forest,only trees.

>wouldn't other countries intervene to stop a tyrannical American government?

Tell that to 50+ million killed under Stalin.

I'm sure every North Korean currently in a labor camp or being tortured is completely satisfied with how well your "interconnected world" is "intervening" to save them.

You ultimately fend for yourself in this world. Never forget that.

You're missing one key point.

The reason for Tyranny has usually had economics as a reason or even backing up the parties that take control.

So economists, business elite, have had a part to play in cause these messes before.

In fact one of the points of contention when the USA was formed, was a fear that the Rothschilds would establish a national bank and steal all the wealth of the country like they did in Britain.

People usually think economics people and the government policies are entirely unconnected. But Big Money talks, and lobbyists are paid to tell politicians what they want.

If you screw with big business... they call your debts due... they move their commerce overseas... they screw you and there's nothing you can do about it if they wanna press the matter.

So you're forgetting one of the major origins of Tyranny... people wanting to control. People who have so much money it becomes a weapon... guess what... they like to control things.

So...

Guns and Arming the population prevents that because its an Apples & Oranges difference in power.

Also keep in mind that one of the ways that Money can be used to Fight other countries is through Mercinaries. Thats been going on for hundreds of years.

These days they are called PMCs or Private Military Corporations. Mercinaries. Paid fighters who will kill anybody for a price, dont matter whether you've delcared war on someone or not.

Connects the dots bud.

Economy - big business - is AS Much an Enemy of the people as it is something they depend on for survival.

You have to keep those bastards at bay - tariffs, regulations, checks and balances. Global economy might as well in itself be a One World Government.

>act as a power check as well?
And if they don't?
See Turkey
Inb4 ignorant cunts defending a man who said he wanted the of Hitler as a way to advance his Islamic agenda

This. If you stop using the proper wording and suddenly libbies will use it against you.
Also no one else can determine tyranny but the subjects themselves.

The US military would swat gun owners and other countries down like flies

It's comical how you people think anyone could take down the world's foremost super power

>Also no one else can determine tyranny but the subjects themselves
People can certainly be lied into using unjust violence against false tyranny.
See the recent murder if innocent police officers.
It is being g done by young men who truly believe that police are out killing people who "dindunuffin" instead of actually being informed of the factual circumstances that in 95% of these cases made them justified.

Nice dubs but retarded picture

>a well-regulated militia

>Because we live in such an interconnected world, wouldn't other countries intervene to stop a tyrannical American government? They would be acting to save lives but also in their interest as well.


Its up to the people of the US to determine their fate. Not some outsiders.

>The US military would swat gun owners and other countries down like flies
How?
5k men with rifles could shut down the entire US power grid leaving the police and national guard entirely occupied dealing with riots and looting in every major city.

After napoleon had been defeated rothschild had a rider bring word to Britain that napoleon had been successful and was coming for britain next.

People sold their stocks for cheap, Rothschilds bought up all of it. Then when real news had come in that napoleon had been defeated... guess who was grinning.

Stole most of Britain's wealth in one day.

People like these are the reason you have wars pretty much. They engineer them. They benefit from them.

>Station National Guard and police at all major infrastructure points
>use surveillance to track anyone moving outside, tap into communications
>mobilize military to enforce martial law

They would know everything going on before any of it happened

Uh huh, that's why a POG nigger with an SKS btfo 2 police departments and had downtown Dallas on lockdown for 12 hours until the PD cashed in their killstreak to use the jihadibot perk.

A domestic insurgency would be a nightmare to overcome. Hopefully it never happens.

Actually this is another myth and it still remains true.

Because we're not talking about 5000 men, we're talking about a percentage of the population across the board.

About 80%.

Does the military have the resources to combat 250,000,000 americans who are pissed at them?

Who are so spread out as to be ubiquitous amongst the landmass.

Nope not even close.

Also the main weapon the military fears is the 7.62x51 (.308) hunting rifle. The Remington 700 and similar weapons. And the various 30-06's and those Mosin Nagants in 7.62x54R

After upwards of 100 years in existance these weapons are still extremely accurate and can even blow through body armor. And will tear through head protection no problem.

Granted they wont usually go through miltiary vehicle armor these days, but you gotta get out of your tank sometime...

The US Military has all the right toys to deal with armed civilians, but they dont have enough of it nor the manpower to man it agaisnt the entire population.

Its not that the civilians would be mounting attacks, its that if you venture out of your military base its a dice roll whether you're coming back.

By the way this is also the reason the Japanese DID NOT invade the western united states during WW2.

They may have made small forays to check, but they knew or discovered quickly it would be Absolute Suicide for their soldiers.

80% casualties on both sides... when your army guys hit about 25% casualties they usually retreat.

Same is true to this day.

>wouldn't other countries intervene to stop a tyrannical American government?

The combined militaries of the entire world would not be able to land a ship on US shores.

Citizens are already here, already dug-in, and outnumber the military 300 to 1.

>2/3 of the country are lard asses vs the military which are very fit soldiers
>using grandpa's old bolt action hunting rifle against modern military weapons
Yeah, I believe the term outgunned and better fighting force is appropriate here

I don't give a damn about other nations and I have no obligation to look out for those nations as an American citizen. I will look after me and my own first. Fuck the world.

If you get rid of the guns... dont matter what the damn reasons are... then you remove this element.

Then you've got much fewer weapons, like divide by 100 the amount.

Then you can use overwhelming force to pressure and herd people around. This is how Hitler was so successful... he took away all the guns. People could get shot or simply comply.

and if there is resistance you can Divide and Conquer and establish strongholds all around it, turn the people against each other, and defeat it that way


Now the real question that might be burning for you is... Who on Earth would bother to try to Invade America being that its surrounded by oceans.

How about the UN army?
Give them the right circumstances, and youll get a multi-lateral force coming in.

>wouldn't other countries intervene to stop a tyrannical American government?
Why?
They are also tyrannical governments

You're just not seeing the numbers here man.

Also you're making generalizations, and you're forgetting that there's 15 Million veterans who know their shit.

Ten times the number of active duty. And half of em are probably still spry or can summon up the strength to act.

You know what? This stupid argument makes the axe meme sound legit.

Why should people have axes? you can buy precut logs at the store.

>but can't other countries (Nato, allies) act as a power check as well?
They can. Whether they do or not doesn't invalidate the need for the citizenry to be armed and ready to remind the government who's boss at all times.

It's the same idea as having police services available. Since police might show up in time to save you from the criminal, does that mean you shouldn't own a gun? That you should delegate all of your personal security to a third party?

>Station National Guard and police at all major infrastructure points
How?
There are millions of electrical substations alone and tens of millions if not hundreds of millions of transformers.
There quite simply isn't enough bodies to do this.
Protip
In the entire DoD there is a total of 250k combat troops

to be honest I think the most effective route to disarming the country and making it vulnerable is to hamper Ammunition Purchases

Because then the people have the guns, but they cant shoot them too much before they're useless. Like dividing the number of guns by 5 and making a steamroll offensive possible.

All it takes is someone smart to figure out a way, I could come up with examples of means to limit ammo purchases and make sure there actually is a cap on how much people get. But my examples probably have loopholes whereas a real genius could come up with one that is virtually foolproof.

Id imagine you could ban certain kinds of ammo so that some guns become useless or have to be rechambered (like what they tried with the .50bmg). Say "you can only use These calibers"... gets rid of the ammo or at least locks in place whatever people already have saved up.

If you're talking about Gun Control what you're actually talking about is undermining the defense of this country... taking away its 5th Column home guard.

So lets get down to business in eroding the security of the country and making it open season for criminals on the public.

If you're serious about gun control, then lets get cooking on this (ie, dropping america's droors).

I said major ones. If a substation is taken out in bumfuck nowhere who gives a shit?

Reloading is a thing.
Also the American people own more firearms than all of the world's militaries combined.
The amount of ammo in American private hands is a number not comprehensible by a Human brain.
It would easily be in the tens if billions of rounds of ammo.
The average hobbyist shooter keeps at least 1k rounds of each caliber they own in case of shortages.
Prepper types go even further and try and keep 1k rounds per gun they own.

People would find ways to make thier own bullets

Anybody from the UK would tell you there is a growing crisis with Stabbings in the UK in the wake of their gun bans.

And criminals still have guns. But even though there are less of them it sure didnt knock down the crime rate.

Same deal with places that have laws against self defense or castle doctrine. Because you cant say "fuck you" and try to kill the criminal, you just die or you get raped and get herpes. Criminals run around like its a party. Cops are as ineffective as they always are.

>I said major ones. If a substation is taken out in bumfuck nowhere who gives a shit?
So you don't know shit about America's infrastructure got it.
Even if you stood soldiers around every substation in America it wouldn't stop a man with a deer rifle putting a few rounds through it from a few hundred yards away and leaving the entire area in the dark.

America's power grid is massive vulnerable and indefensible.
Speaking from pure ignorance won't change this.

Who gives a fuck about other countries. The constitution is not for their benefit.

I think dorner proved this as well. He had the lapd pissing thier pants.

Although the handgun ban did nothing to prevent crime, it didn't increase it regardless of what you may have read on some fantasy websites. There was an increase in crime, but considering that prior to the 1997 handgun ban it was not possible to CC a weapon there can be no connection between street violence and a handgun ban. The increase in crime was nearly all to do with the change in government, and a change in what classed as a crime.

The only part of the UK where a CC is allowed and handgun ownership is common is Northern Ireland and they still have a relatively high crime rate.

Also digest this
If 10% of gun owners I outright revolted they would be 25 million strong.
And ti reiterate the point
The entire armed forces has 250k combat troops and all police in this nation are under 2million.

And this is giving you a huge fallacious and easily verifiably false benefit of all of them would be loyal to any tyrannical government.
Which they won't.
Currently right now less than 25% of cops support enforcement of a gun registration.

Reloading is a thing but like I said there are ways to control all the loose ends. Reloading depends on primers, which can be made from some household stuff in a pinch, but they have always been a chemistry-heavy activity and you'd need someone like Breaking Bad to make them for you.

Like I said this would severely limit the number of bullets out there by practical issues. And dont forget the DHS and NSA would still be looking for people doing stuff like this and would conduct night raids from helicopters and there would be media blackout on it - off to gitmo those folks go.

What the hell do you think Jade Helm 15 was about anyways? They were training for this sorta thing.

Haha and thats only Electrical

Lets also factor in the safety of the Internet backbone

And dont forget the Natural Gas pipelines, thats still a major resource. I mean check out the movie "Live Free or Die Hard" and youll get what im saying.

Natural Gas is how alot of people still cook food, despite the growing prevalence of electric stoves.

Not this retard again.

Learn 2 warfare bro.

Yup and it seems the going rate for cops vs. ambushes is about 3-5 cops trade for 1 shooter.

So that 2 million cops might as well be 250K (would say 500K but half of them would probably give up the job)

This. Neither China nor Russia would intervene unless they were going to get something out of it. If Civil War II starts, rebels might see support, but only because China or Russia or whomever thinks that its geopolitical position will be improved. Key for the rebels getting that support is to take possession of the US's nuclear arsenal so that the US government couldn't nuke whomever was helping us.

>A fighter jet cannot enforce a police state

oh really?

And that was one man
Imagine tens of millions of them.
Throughout the entire nation with hundreds of thousands of them in well organized militia forces compromising of ex military and special forces vets.

Hell take that one coon in Dallas.
I'm not saying he was justified(we are extremely far off of dealing with truly tyrannical government) but he killed all those cops with a damn SKS Alone before they took him down with a Jerry rigged explosive device because the cops were both on a revenge mission and to cowardly to act directly.

Just like the U.S and others got involved in Turkey. Oh wait...

Dependence on others? Communism.

>but like I said there are ways to control all the loose ends
Tje government can't stop the flow of drugs into prisons the idea they could stop the flow of anything in the nation at large is delusional.
> What the hell do you think Jade Helm 15 was about anyways?
Literally nothing.
Not everything is a grand conspiracy

These guys werent using top notch weaponry either.

Remember what I said... 7.62x51mm... shoots though 1/2 inch of solid steel.

And still hits you as hard as a shotgun through the vest (though due to bullet size its more liek taking a 44 magnum to your fleshy chest)

Several weapons: AR-10, PTR-91, Kel-Tec RFB, these are semi automatic with 20 shot capacities.

In the hands of a proper veteran or ex special forces the only chance cops got is dice man.

I mean you get hit with this you're down, unless it was a graze or by some damn luck only managed to be a flesh wound. This is industrial strength shit, blow your leg clean off type of thing.

Fuck they'd probably even get away, then the cops gotta fish up some dudes that sound suspicious for the public to see that "yeah we caught the shooter"

I expect thats what really happened with Baton Rouge. Except for the dude they shot dead I think the real shooters are still out there. They probably covered that up to seem like they wasnt weak to the public.

350 million privately owned firearms against 200k federal LEOs, ~750k state and local LEOs and around 2.3 million in the military. Now, figure that a lot of the LEOs are going to either stay out of it or side with the rebels, and at least half of the military is going to defect. That's also ignoring that the vast majority of people in the military are not combat troops, but are in support roles.

On top of that, the government would have to know who to drop bombs on. We Americans have an advantage there: We blend in. Even worse is that leveling cities cuts the government's own supply chains, so that's a non-starter right there. They could only use the big ordinance in limited circumstances.

Even worse is that we could cut whatever parts of the East Coast we wanted to off of basic supplies, like food.

The reason we have the right to bear arms is because we were founded by pioneers and frontiersman whose deeply individualistic ideals were concerned first and foremost with the freedom to think and to say what we really think, but secondly with the freedom to provide for oneself and defend ones own security.

It's not about overthrowing the guberment, it's about keeping government baby-sitting out of our everyday life.

>ITT: Edgelords that think they can take on the U.S military with their tapco sks and Tannerite IED's.
You people would get DESTROYED.
You aren't willing to stand up to cops who are literally killing innocent fucking people every day.
You aren't willing to stand up to Obama
You aren't willing to stand up to or stop Hillary
Hell, I bet you wouldn't stand up to a fucking street thug.
Quit pretending you could stand up to a predator drone.
This thread is a joke and so are all of you.

BUT user IS 2016 FOR FUCKS SAKE

You forget about the Declaration Of Independence.

Which its a secret but... takes precidence over the Constitution.

The shot heard around the world... you know what that was about?

British declared no more guns would be imported into the colonies. Then the British went up the road and decided to start confiscating the Cannons.

Without any direction whatsoever... the people guarding them said fuck that and started shooting them.

I believe probably 90% chance anybody tries to take the guns modern day... same kneejerk reaction... itll be civil war.

Have we gone in and "saved" Turkey?
Cause Ergodan is in the process of going full tyrant and nobodies stopping it.

In a Guerrilla war, which is what it would turn into, a Model 700 in the hands of somebody who knows how to properly use it is going to trump an M4. M4s are great for kicking down doors and CQB shit, but not so much for longer range stuff. At 500 yards, that hunting rifle will be far superior.

I believe their strategy for taking the guns is to try to carefully, grassroots level, get rid of them on an individual basis.

Sorta a slow burn martial law kinda thing. KEK doesnt know its being cooked because its being warmed up slowly.

You think your hotter than you actually are in real life.

That IS what is happening now.
State by state. They will all slowly fall.
When people finally try to resist, they will be too few and too far in between.

M4 is a piece of crap for range. Official stats released based on the M855 ammunition is that its unreliable beyond 150 yards and its performance falls off real bad past 300.

Its basically a P-90 with a longer sight radius and less ammo.

Tell them you're part native-american, and can still remember what happened last time the government disarmed your people

...

Like all gun control arguments, this is ignorant and irrelevant. To take the bait, not only might we agree with say a Vietnamese who takes up arms against American forces that are beibg tyrannical, I think you skipped the explanation of why foreigners three thousand miles away are subject to the Constitution.
But by all means, please continue to argue for gun control using "arguments" like this.

Actually I think talking about it causes moderate people to find out the truth and get redpilled.

Might be bait but it wakes some people up.

Yeah, unless they are expecting body armor on their targets, they need to get rid of that POS M855 ball. A while back, they went to (IIRC, it's been a while) 77gr Sierras in Afghanistan because they were getting a lot of longer range shots, and the 77gr Sierras were superior at a distance.

I wonder how many people who were attacked still manage to survive... for better or worse

The only way they could do so would be with conventional military forces, but the US could destroy the conventional military forces of any country in the world.

If the US goes rogue then many policemen and current and former soldiers would join the armed civilians and together they could take down the government. Foreigners attacking the US isn't really an option.

Also legally speaking it might just be vetoed in the Security Council. The US would veto it and nobody could do it legally.

America is more powerful than the rest of NATO, the only two countries that "could" match up to us is China (but they are probably just a paper tiger) and Russia (Our Navy would wipe them out before they could do anything). The only way any country could even reach us is with help from within the country to keep the military and police tied up on the mainland. Additionally all of these countries have their own interests at heart, if they are still benefiting from us, or even if they gain more from being neutral towards us, they probably will. Unless our country is unstable enough to guarantee a relatively easy victory, they wouldn't fight us. Finally as was said before the only two countries that could match us are China and Russia, why would you want to be ruled by either of those. Guns not only protect from our governments tyranny, but other governments as well.

But to answer the points that you brought up... you along with most of the educated adults who read the paper and watch the nightly news... were kinda sorta taught a lie.

In school, in history class and social studies we were taught that doing the right thing was the obvious way to do things. And that it would be denounced otherwise by the whole world whenever the world found out.


But In Practice...
Countries only do what is in their best interests. And at worst can do some really evil things and label them as Something Else that they're actually doing (ie, for a different reason than is actually being done).

And yes even the Industrialized Developed nations do this. What you hear on the news is the sugarcoated version while they may be doing something completely different.

And the true reasons may be Classified.


You know why USA really went to Iraq?
Saddam Hussein was gonna sell his oil in Gold Bricks from that point on, not US dollars. They had to stop that shit.

So they made up a story about weapons. In the end they never found any there. People still accepted it.

See that has always led me to think that maybe there was some fixing or rigging with national weapons being done. Like back in the 40s the russians develop the superior weapon, we get the crappier one to balance the fact we're more effective in logistics and air force.

Even during vietnam us soldiers often preferred AK-47 because the shots would go through underbrush and tree branches better.

Average engagement range for soldiers is 120 yards. Beyond that you need to be using a scope or binoculars to really notice movement. AK reaches out to 300 reliably.

Meanwhile the Ideal choice has always been a 6.5mm but there were always seemingly off topic reasons given for not choosing it.

Then in the late 80s (?) the russians stopped using the 7N6 ammo, the "poison bullet" and now they're nerfed.

We go into iraq, and like magic, they say we gotta take the armor plating off the hum-vees. Making soldiers standing targets against snipers and mines.

Just a pattern im noticing.

Natural rights don't exist.

>6.5mm

KEK, I'm building an AR-10 and the barrel that I bought is chambered in 260 Rem. With the right bullet, the 7.62 has more energy at the muzzle, but the 260 takes over at around 150yds-175yds, and it's all gravy from there.

And that pattern that you're noticing probably has more to do with committee made decisions and war profiteering than anything else.

Interesting that you mention that about the US miltiary.

In an armed rebellion/civil war in the mainland USA the Navy isnt all that effective. And the Navy is the strongest asset that the US Mil has.

Air Force only works well if you've got infrastructure backing it up - but its easy to forget that in the case of WROL that supply line is effectively cut. They dont get backup, they only got what they got and eventually it runs out (rather quick actually).

Air Force is always a logistics and support type of thing anyway. You use it for surveillance and to hit key targets. You cant fight a whole war with it unless your entire war is against somebody's Tanks.

Air Force is a helper but they cant effectively engage spread out civilian presence. Not unless they wanna use Nukes against their own people.

At that point what are you down to?
Army and Marines and their associated vehicles. And all that is on the ground. Where the sniper rifles and booby traps are.

Philosophical issue.

Declaration Of Independence set it as a precident that all people had certain god-given rights. It didnt go into full details, it said "among them are..." and then gives a few examples.

In legal terms this goes to deeper levels of laws from biblical times, and it is accepted at that point that we do have "god given" rights.

Split the hairs fine enough and a Yes does come out of the argument.

But they dont want you to know that, they want you to believe that rights are privledges issued by the govt.

rights are a totally man-made things. it basically means things you can do that the people in charge won't attack you for doing.

>they want you to believe that rights are privledges issued by the govt
That's exactly what they are, though. At any time, the government can decide that you don't have rights. To extend that further, in any situation, the man with the most guns decides what you can and cannot do. The only natural right is the violence.

is violence*

Thumbs up on that.
I like what ive heard about the 260, but its a 6.5mm class so it only proves the point more.

IMO the ideal selection for firearms could be split into just 3 different calibers. And left alone from that point on except for special purpose weapons.

* 9mm pistol round with 700 ft-lb behind it, with sabot subcaliber slugs for PDWs.
* Rifle round in 6.5mm class
* Medium MG and DMR round in 8.5mm or 9mm diameter (4500 ft-lb behind it).

>Because we live in such an interconnected world, wouldn't other countries intervene to stop a tyrannical American government?
Other countries of the world don't have the luxury of invading foreign countries just because they don't like the governments.

They will intervene in the US only if the S has already HTF. And it wouldn't be in order to 'protect civilians', nor for humanitarian reasons, but rather to protect their own interests. They are just as likely to support the government as they are to support the rebels.

Your interlocutors are proposing a fantasy world in which foreign countries with a massive US military prescence inside their borders (Germany, UK, Etc.) are going to start intervening in internal US business. If that began to happen they would be in for some major shit, as the US government would instantly send the armed forces on a fucking rampage in their own home countries.

tell them fuck you this is america and i like my guns
some cunt comedian said that and i hate that fucking cunt but thats all you ever need to say, dont fucking argue with idiots

The point of rights isn't that it's physically impossible to violate them, it's that there are certain things which it is immoral to infringe on simply because of the nature of mankind. A government is certainly capable of passing a law against your natural rights, but under the theory of natural rights it is always unarguably wrong to do so.

You can disagree with that notion, and there's plenty of philosophy to back you up, but be sure you're arguing against the correct concept and not the strawman. Libs and statists *want* you to believe the concept is some ridiculous and easily-disproved notion of power, not a moral position built into the Constitution.

It's going to be badass having a precision rifle that will be able to accept 20 and 25 round mags. Right now, I have the stripped lower on order and it has been for about a month now (fucking Orlando), and I need the handguard, gas block, gas tube, charging handle, a crush washer for the flash suppressor, buffer, buffer tube, spring, stock, bipod mount and optics. I'm eventually going to drop a really nice trigger in it too, but for now the shitty milspec one will do.

The only problem with it is that it's going to be a heavy mofo with that 24" semi-bull barrel.

>Because we live in such an interconnected world, wouldn't other countries intervene to stop a tyrannical American government? They would be acting to save lives but also in their interest as well.

No

>Read; China

Fucking jet posters