So we are free to build laser blasters and microwave guns? Or are they not part of the "fossilized synecdoche"?

But I guess that small arms are such a rusty relic of history that nobody uses them any more...

Hyperbole aside, I'm not sure I support his basic premise about the purpose of the Bill of Rights. They exist to give the citizens the tools to resist government oppression. The founding fathers didn't enter lightly into the Revolution and when they tried less extreme measures (letter writing campaigns, citizen committees passing resolutions, etc.) they didn't accomplish squat. That's why they gave citizens the right to spread word of abuses, physically resist tyranny, be secure in their privacy, not incriminate themselves, etc. It wasn't so Joe Citizen wouldn't get fingered for cheating on his taxes, it was so he couldn't be compelled to confess through torture.

I don't care if it's a 100 year old handgun or a Pangalactic Noggin Blaster, a person without the ability to use force in their own defense is just a serf.

But, it seems that what people are forgetting is that with great power comes great responsibility. One of the freedoms that are so worth protecting is the freedom of a law that is applied equally. Equal justice under the law and all that old news. So would you release your own Nike missile at your neighbor because his dog keeps crapping in your yard? Only if you were willing to pay, both financially and legally, for the fallout, as it were...

phreddy wrote:

Well stated Goober.  If guns are an archaic remnant of days gone by, then why does every present day tyrannical government ban their ownership?  It certainly is not to protect the citizens from one another.

The point my friend is that you happily allow them to regulate arms.  For lack of a more current topic Drone regulation should be mentioned...

You don't need the means to violently overthrow a government in order to prevent tyranny. You just need to increase the cost to such a point as it becomes untenable. Just like petty criminals, if the target can defend itsself, they will move on to easier pickings.

It's a lot harder to sweep the story of a botched midnight SWAT raid under the rug when a cop is wounded. Make no mistake, the police would rather do their business in secrecy, and any publicity is bad publicity in these cases of overreach. It barely makes the news when some little old lady is raided due to a bureaucratic snafu, unless she's packing, and then it starts to make people wonder why the police are kicking in doors and tossing grenades while looking for someone making mean comments about the mayor.

Without the first amendment to bring you the stories, you would never know about this kind of behavior on the part of what is ostensibly "your" police force. And without the second amendment there would be a lot more of them.

They said it all in the video - they are more concerned with their own safety than the safety of the citizens they are sworn to protect.  The heroes are long gone and we are left with uniformed thugs with guns.