04-19-2020, 09:40 AM
(04-19-2020, 07:54 AM)6andcounting Wrote: It's hard to disagree with the actions and precautions taken in this particular instance. As I've said, I think the government ultimately did what they had to is this case. My worry - and that what was my question was about - is the precedent it sets and how easily everyone was to control. Those who disagree and are protesting (who I think are dumb in this case) have been stamped out with relative ease. So sure I disagree with the protestors, but I don't like the government have the kind of power and control they have exhibited here. I myself don't have a good answer to my own question as it's hard to look at the question in context when I don't have a particular problem with the government's action in this situation.
Wait, so all those guns for the second revolution...the take over of government and getting "our rights back"...none of that happened during a time of almost martial law? Weird.
And that was WITHOUT the army getting involved.
Ya know it's almost like these guys are all talk and no action. That having the guns to make them feel "safe" is really more about the image of having the guns than actually being organized enough, dare I say "well regulated" enough, to fight back. Thinking that if they had a big enough stockpile they could overthrow the big, bad government whenever they wanted to. Instead they carried signs and then went home.
Strange.
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.