Originally posted by Wotan
It has nothing to do with 'living standards'. Freemen remain free only when they have the ability to defend themselves. There's a difference between a 'right' and just wanting something.
Living stantards had to do with the revolution thing, started by change of the 2nd amendment.
Revolutions are quite messy business.
Besides the private gun owners would have little say in a revolution.
Nowadays it'd be all about the actual army and their equiptment.
Whoever the army supports, will be leading the country as he wishes and nobody has any say in that, did the 2nd amendment exist or not.
If part of the army defects to rebels, that army would play a major role in the revolution, not "the people of the 2nd amendment".
It could been different back in the days, when "the people of the 2nd amendment" WERE the army.
Back then you could've also fought the enemy also with bayonets, because the enemy was equipped with similar weapons.
Besides, why to force people into something, it's all about manipulation nowadays.
So, in practice the 2nd amendment hardly protects anyones freedom.
The Bush government already got you guys into a war against Iraq, with the major reasons for the war being lies. All they did, was to manipulate majority of the people to support the war by making them believe it's all true and an immediate threat to their lives.
the capitalism and free press is a lovely thing when you lead them with a carrot at the far end of a stick.
If need be, the media makes up the opinion of the majority to support your agenda.
No gun nor constitution protected your freedom from a propaganda, a fact which hundreds of US soldiers and families have faced with the Iraq war.
