truly implores one to ponder
Truly implores one to ponder
Tyler Flores
Other urls found in this thread:
buzzfeed.com
countercurrentnews.com
myfox8.com
thefederalistpapers.org
foxnews.com
washingtonpost.com
gunowners.org
kgw.com
controversialtimes.com
youtube.com
100percentfedup.com
en.wikipedia.org
washingtonpost.com
chicagotribune.com
frontpagemag.com
businessinsider.com
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
thefederalist.com
theguardian.com
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Jordan Hughes
Nobody gives a fuck
Benjamin Williams
thye kinda seem to
Isaac Gray
they sure did earn their pay that day
Lucas Stewart
ban cars, all they do is cause accidents and pollute the atmosphere. you don't need to drive over 20 miles per hour
Christopher Wright
My rights are worth more than your dead, faggot.
John Clark
Needs to be at least one for King George on the tyrant count.
Eli Adams
The right side should be "people killed by niggers"
Ayden Wood
The likelihood of a tyrant coming into power in the first place might be smaller tho if the population is armed and willing to use these arms.
Adam Ortiz
Shill thread, OP already made a post that's still going on. Kill yourself faggot.
Leo Morgan
Well, then why were they all over Trump about assassinating Hillary Clinton? She's a corrupt tyrant who is cheating to win.
Grayson Robinson
Your feelings end where my rights begin.
Gavin Morales
Deaths caused by tyrants > deaths caused by gun violence.
James Brooks
yeah i bet the hypothetical tyrant would be scared shitlessof Cletus' shotgun
Jack Sanchez
So gun ownership = no tyrants?
Seems like a good idea then, if tyrants are allergenic to guns
Robert Parker
So said General Grant until he awoke to bayonets at Shiloh.
Ryder Foster
They should be.
Not implying JFK was one.
Cooper White
The shotgun might be enough to discourage soldiers and the military, like in Iraq or Vietnam.
Ayden Thomas
This irony of the implied statement is that the second amendment was granted directly after and in regards to us overthrowing our tyrannical masters.
Adrian Mitchell
Guns are used for defense a lot more than for crime.
Gavin Jackson
...
Nathan Peterson
source?
Matthew Cook
oh
Carter Gonzalez
yeah
Dylan Reyes
apex kek
Liam Martinez
If only we could know how many tyrants and violent crimes have been deterred by private weaponry
Ethan Ward
DONT TALK SHIT ABOUT CLETUS
Colton Ramirez
Implore? Hah. I, I implores you to go back and focus on current topics, ya know stuff that actually matters.
Jaxson Rogers
allow me to clue you in
Daniel Reyes
>Tyrants overthrown: 0
u wot m8?
>Not factoring in all the would-be tyrants discouraged by an armed populace
Mason Reed
What the fuck are those goddamn stars
Leo Cox
If a mass shooting breaks out, and no innocents die because the shooter is killed instantly, does it still make the news?
Easton Gutierrez
So we're supposed to weigh the importance of america defeating the british against the lives of a bunch of normies who likely didnt exercise their right to be armed?
Or is the comic supposed to imply that murder is allowed by the second amendment?
LOLSKI POLSKI
Gabriel Flores
Not that I disagree with you but
>(((leaf)))
Lincoln Collins
Then it wouldnt be a mass shooting, japanon.
Jaxson Miller
>tyrants overthrown: 0
how was this country founded again?
fuck off poland if not for our intervention in WW1 you wouldnt even fucking exist
Sebastian Morales
History is full of rulers being ousted (or at the very least thwarted) by armed resistance/uprising.
That's how the US gained independence from the British.
That's how the French sabotaged the occupying Nazis.
That's how Castro ousted Batista.
That's how the communists gained power of Russia.
etc.
etc.
etc.
In each of these instances, the armed rebels would readily classify their enemy as a "tyrant".
Ryder Moore
Why are you Eurofags always concerned about the happenings in America. Fuck off and worry about your assimilation into Islam.
Sebastian Howard
eeh, it seems to me there is a logical fault here. Because IF an armed civilian stops a mass shooting, then, it would probably just be a shooting. Since it was stopped before it became a "mass" shooting. How many shootings (without mass, no pun intended) has been stopped by armed civilians?
Kevin Wilson
>hurr durr you exercise every day but you aren't obese so exercising is useless
Fuck off.
Brody Davis
Yeah, I know. The statement that no mass shootings have been stopped is a bit absurd, since it is impossible to know how many lives are saved by law abiding citizens with their guns.
Nathan Edwards
...
Hudson Fisher
you have no idea how fragile systems of government are, do you?
take down the power grid and cause division in the white house = chaos.
bunch of "rednecks" = people obsessed with guns that spend most of their leisurely time shooting and living very simply aka can survive without electricity.
Wyatt Morris
also, russians would support texas and send troops. enjoy getting btfo by citizens and ruskies.
Charles Baker
That's why they cant beat some dune niggers with aks after 15 years.
Anthony Richardson
Yes it has
Bentley Jones
so how many tyrannies has america had? if the answer is 0, the second amendment is doing its work. the second amendment is preventing tyrannies.
this picture is flawed logic.
Jack Morris
>tyrants overthrown
How about tyrants deterred from tyrannical actions, faggot.
Saged.
Owen Bailey
this. the key word is prevention, not reaction.
Grayson Harris
these people don't get it.
many possible rebels would be Texans and many of them had much military training and real combat experience and have more personal training in the backneck than the military itself offers.
what are they going to shoot missiles at? any citizen could be the enemy
it's impossible for the nation to suddenly take away everyones guns. never going to happen aside from nuking your own nation
Jacob Wood
>implying tyrants allow their subjects to have guns
>implying guns don't inherently deter tyranny in the first place
Andrew Harris
they could also be overthrown, don't underestimate cletus.
Brody Hill
we've got one now, the last 6 months has made that clear, looks like we might be able to deal with it peacefully though thanks to the 2A
you've got problems of your own though I hear - what's up with Royal Dutch Shell?
Daniel Hill
Most people get it. My fellow euros but not fellow lib-tards are just trying to push you into a melt-down
Jordan Cox
I see.
Josiah Wright
So, Krystof, with 98 percent of the civilian population armed. How are you gong to KNOW who to send your drones after?
Jacob Martin
mmm. I think they'd be scared enough. Ever hear of asymmetric warfare faggot?
Christian Morris
You can't maintain a police state with tanks and drones.
End of the day you need boots on the ground, people willing and able to police.
How many people you think are willing to play Secret Police when half the people they run into are potentially armed vs when none of them are?
Adam Cruz
buzzfeed.com
countercurrentnews.com
myfox8.com
thefederalistpapers.org
foxnews.com
washingtonpost.com
Fact Sheet: Guns Save Lives - gunowners.org
Clackamas mall shooter faced man with concealed weapon - kgw.com
controversialtimes.com
youtube.com
100percentfedup.com
en.wikipedia.org
washingtonpost.com
chicagotribune.com
frontpagemag.com
businessinsider.com
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
en.m.wikipedia.org
Noah Martin
Whoever made this is a racist who hates black people.
If John Wilkes Booth had not shot Abraham Lincoln when he did. Abraham Lincoln would have went forward with his plan of deporting the African-Americans.
Eli Thompson
i think thatwould require a mass surveillance of some sort. unthinkable i know
Eli Kelly
See For perhaps the most recent example, see: thefederalist.com
They don't become mass shootings precisely because someone stops them with a gun.
Aaron Bennett
>he believes this
it's not like chinks with ak-47s hiding in the woods sent the Amerifat military running home or anything
Ayden Reyes
>Number of years since ratification of 2nd amendment: 225
>Number of years without a tyrannical government: 225
Zachary Howard
>i think thatwould require a mass surveillance of some sort. unthinkable i know
I'm guessing sarcasm, and as such, mediocre but not at all bad Bantz from Polskiland. I'm guessing you are thinking about various NoSuchAgency surveillance programs. However, if you haven't been already. I suggest you take a road trip ALONE into the US heart lands. You'll be surprised how many live more-or-less "off the grid" as they say.
Sebastian Wright
...
Jaxon Lewis
go away troll.
every gun law is an infringement.
Jacob Thompson
go away troll.
every gun law is an infringement.
this is why we can't have nice things........
Isaac Clark
What fallacy is this?
Ian Fisher
Where the fuck is Lincoln?
Grayson Peterson
Jack Russell
It's called strawman. He is arguing against an argument no one is, or at minimum none on Sup Forums were, making. It's also burden of proof and historical illiteracy.
It neatly summarizes the argumentative abilities of the Left and is a friendly reminder to be prepared to defend yourselves against deceit and ignorance. You should thank the OP for the opportunity.
Henry Thompson
it's not a strawman, it's just an irrelevant conclusion, a distraction. people get killed without the second amendment aswell, as seen in europe.
Angel Wilson
Good question
Hunter Evans
Sup Forums BTFO
Jaxon Reed
Still have my gun, bitch. No one will take it away, not even government. :)
What are you gonna do about it?
Alexander Ortiz
The strawman is in countering the argument that the 2nd Amendment exists, perhaps exclusively, for the purpose of overthrowing a tyrannical government. Very few seriously argue for the 2nd Amendment on that basis, and especially not that basis alone.
OP's picture was addressing an argument few advance as if it were the only argument which existed. It then gives the burden of proof to the viewer to address the argument of zero tyrants overthrown, despite the picture itself originating the argument. Of course, the idea zero tyrants have been overthrown by use of arms is historical illiteracy.
It could also, as you indicated, be considered wrong direction. The argument in OP's picture could possibly be understood as applying the logic, "Zero tyrants have been overthrown by arms, thus a right to bear arms for the purpose of overthrowing a tyrant is meaningless." This is flagrantly false the moment one considers countries outside of the United States, but even if we were to assume it were true for the special case of the United States, we could equally say, "No tyrant has yet existed precisely because of the threat of a citizenry which bears arms." This is a tenuous argument which relies on the theory that our right to bear arms is the major factor in our perceived lack of hard tyranny.
It is better to address the broader issue of our right to self defense than be sucked into a narrow argument on government overthrow, in my opinion, as it advances a principle instead of a single interest or outcome. It also makes one look less paranoid to the average onlooker compared to discussions of theoretical rebellion.