When it comes to the violent overthrow of our government Alabama's Rep. Mo Brooks wants to keep his options open

Sorta. It was more about self-governance. If the British had responded with negotiation, the colonies would have been fine with that. It would have been much more in their interest to avoid a big fight with a superpower.


As @DukeTrout says, it was about gaining independence from the United Kingdom, not about ending the existing government or the monarchy. The colonies might not have shed a tear if the reign of the Hanovers ended, but that wasn’t their goal.


Arguably, tax breaks for the rich.


does he not know he is “the government”?

Oh I bet he could be convinced to change his mind.

I’m still partial to a limit of “everything beyond the epidermis.” It’s not like we’re all using the same definitions for all the other words in the constitution, so why not change this one?

Unless I’m mistaken the Second is the only Amendment in the Bill of Rights that the Founders felt compelled to provide an explicit rationale for within the Amendment itself.

They didn’t explain why they thought it was important to protect free speech or let citizens refuse to provide quarter to troops or avoid incriminating themselves in court because the rationale behind those rights seemed self-evident. But when it came to “bearing arms” they gave an explicit reason—the need for a well-regulated militia.

Almost as if they were worried their intent might be misinterpreted if they didn’t elaborate.


Yeah, now that you mention it, why do the police get first dibs on all that old military gear…? :face_with_monocle: seems very anti-2nd amendment. The citizens need it moar!

(/s if it needs saying!)


Republicans: Support our Troops! Back the Blue!
Also Republicans: We must be prepared to slaughter those jackbooted thugs at a moment’s notice!


I’m only saying that we need to work on the process in which folks can no longer feel it necessary to go out and harm others over some misguided beliefs, thinking “I need to buy a gun.”

This ties directly into reasons for attacking BLM protesters, interfering with school board meetings, etc.
Guns are the tool in which they can reinforce their oppression. Fewer, smaller guns is good. No guns would be better. But the best thing is working on our young men by socializing them and teaching them how to deal with their conflicting beliefs and anger so they don’t want to oppress others.

Still, as we all know, this is a huge kettle of fish to fry.


Apparently members of militias are having all kinds of legal problems these days. I’m sure Brooks and the NRA will be outraged by this /s:


that doesn’t really explain why attacks like this are so particularly american. beyond just the scale of harm, the intention of harm seems fundamentally different.

my armchair sense is that - similar to suicidal ideation, where the existence of guns can exacerbate a suicidal mental state - there is probably a mass shooting ideation that takes root when it seems a possible action

a person who has the thought “boy id like to hurt people” takes a very different road if they know they can hurt - and even kill - than someone who knows they can’t

our tools influence our choices. and it seems reasonable to believe that tools designed for mass murderer don’t just enable it, they encourage it

it’s not like there’s this number of knife or bomb attacks in canada just because they don’t have the guns. the thought process is inevitably just different


and we could telegraph that to them by banning the guns. as long as we don’t, we’re saying that using violence to solve problems is blessed by this society


I repeat – I am fine with banning guns. They play no part in my life except for 2 suicides in the maternal side of my family.

Our culture is the problem. Guns manufactured with the intention of anything other than responsible hunting are the symptom.

Borrowing this from @chgoliz


Government: enjoy your precision drone strike!


That would be the same part that talks about how the American Revolution started because the Crown was trying to take colonists’ guns.

It’s all self-serving myths and lies.

These are people who read ‘America is a gun’ and think “Yup. Damn right. Freeeeeedom!!!”

I don’t know of any other place on earth that idolises and obsesses over guns like the US. I’d say that’s the start and end of it.


This assumes a fantasy version of America where “the people” of all political persuasions would agree that the government needs to be overthrown. This isn’t going to happen.

How would he feel if it is the left who want to violently overthrow the government?

Elections are the way to guage the views of the people on changing the government.


Or his constitution is one of these:

I didn’t find a detailed analysis, but this sounds about right:

Other quotations center on the need for people to take power for themselves, and not let government lay too heavy a hand on their affairs.


Oh my! I checked out the organization that distributes those things, and their Form 990 is just so precious, like it was filled out by a fifth-grader.


This doesn’t surprise me at all. Supremacists call themselves Christians, but use edited versions of the Bible. They’ve got a long history of weaponizing ignorance to gain and manipulate their followers, or to control and oppress others. They have no problem burning the source material, either - that goes along with discouraging people from reading. :grimacing:
(from ST:TOS “The Omega Glory”)


And yet 15 years after the US government was born George Washington sent 13,000+ troops annihilate 600 rebels who thought the federal government had become too tyrannical with whiskey taxes.

The “right to rebellion” crowd are literally the dumbest among us.

Homer Simpson Thinking GIF