In a hypothetical situation where the government is trying to take tyrannical control of the country the army HAS to support them. If they don't then the entire scenario is moot, because it doesn't matter if there is a 2nd amendment when the military doesn't do as told either.
The US isn't Syria. We are talking about smuggling in some old, low grade Russian nukes. We are talking about a missile or bomb, virtually immobile except during deployment or by a train. Further, US nuclear supplies are very heavily guarded, if there comes a time when they are used against citizens, they aren't going to be able to get their hands on anything serious, and that still doesn't say why we would possibly need the second amendment, since it is rather obviously illegal to posses nukes or other WMD.
If the US falls and the military goes with them there is absolutely nothing the rest of the world could do short of starting a nuclear war. The US has the most ridiculously outsized and overspent military in the world, and we have a hardware to back that up.
Note: One thing about this, personally I don't think gun control would help much, some, but not very much. I just don't see the rationale for keeping guns so easily avaliable that someone who is obviously insane can get several of them. The amendment itself was written in a very odd way, it doesn't say that "The American public is free to have any weapons they so choose." or "The government will make no attempt to stop the manufacture and sale of weapons to and by citizens". Instead it is worded very vaguely, as if the people writing it didn't really know what they meant.
Last edited:
