What if the slaves in the early US had
- Thread starter Crazyhole
- Start date
Then they would shoot racists POS like you in the head
I would have been the first to give them the guns. Cuz I'm not a liberal and stuff.
What if jews had guns in nazi Germany? Or the surrounding countries had armed citizens?
Kind of a conundrum for the left, isn't it? Call the right a bunch of racist Nazis but those racist Nazis want to allow people to protect themselves.
Look crazy hole , first it's a stupid question. Its like asking what if Superman was Russian . Imagine if he lands in a wheat field in the Soviet Union back in 55 and not in Kansas . The world as we know it is very different. Two, after Biden did his best Cornholio gig last week maybe you should consider a revamped avatar? Just saying .
or the natives had guns? could have shot all the pilgrims during Thanksgiving #1
The English allowed the colonists to have guns and it still took 200 years to kick them out.
This is a pretty simplistic view of things. You can be for some gun control measures without being against guns across the board. Secondly, it is hilarious you think people on the right are worried about minorities protecting themselves, when they would likely be the first people to confront or call the police if they saw a minority with a gun.
If slaves had guns or any rights whatsoever they wouldn’t be slaves.
True. Kind of a dumb premise to this thread to begin with.
dumb threads in the water cooler? doesn't add up.
Pretty good reason to protect the 2nd amendment then, wouldn't you say? Can't enslave people that have guns.
The second ammendment existed during slavery times.
This hypothetical is stupid. What if inmates had guns?
Nobody is taking away the 2nd amendment. And as Jeremy pointed out, the 2nd amendment was around during slavery, and it didn't help the slaves.
I don't think African countries had the second amendment back then. also not sure it applied to enslaved people once they got here
But we had it here, and plenty of people born in this country didn't get to benefit from it. It isn't the amendments themselves that matter, it is how they are put into practice. IN this scenario, the 2nd amendment was worthless to many people, so now saying we must "protect" it in a thread about slavery is pretty ironic. This is kind of toeing the line of critical race theory stuff (not really, but I am sure people will say it is), so you can probably see why so many simpletons are against CRT, because it debunks their altering of history pretty easily.
Last edited:
And people willing to do his dirty work for him, lets not forget that he had many citizens on his side.
Growing up, I found it hard to believe that one man -- Adolf Hitler -- could get so many 'regular' people to believe in his BS.
Ironically, after all the crap we've been going through in this country with the number of so-called, 'regular' people who still believe all of Trump's BS including his "Stop the Steal" shenanigans, it's not hard at all.
Our democracy has never been more threatened than it is now.
I agree, and it is the same kind of tactic. I dont think Trump wants to kill all the Jews by any stretch, but he is still using the idea that people are taking the country from the "real Americans" and "patriots" which is of course BS. The problem is our country, and this applies to both parties, have sold out to corporate interests instead of the interests of the people. I understand why people are angry at the government, I am angry with them too. But Trump isnt going to stop that and he isnt some sort of savior for the middle class. He wants his big corporate donors too, he is putting in the same judges that McConnell is passing along to him, all of whom are approved by the Federalist society, which is essentially a corporate think tank.
There is a clip going around on twitter where someone asked Charlie Kirk when it was going to be time to take up guns. What do these people think is going to happen if they start killing people they dont agree with? Do they think it is going to improve their lives? Republicans do a great job of making people think their shitty lives are caused by liberals, when in reality it is caused just as much, and probably more, by Republican policies.
I'm pretty sure it did apply to them, but beyond that: who kept them from obtaining guns and why?
This sounds great, and there is some level of truth to it, but their is an opposite side to this. It also makes it easier for a leader to convince his followers to keep him in power if they have the use of force to do so. And of course, it means you are going to have more violence just in day to day life, which we see all the time in this country.
The responses have been pretty entertaining. "Racist", "jerk-off", "stupid", "dumb", "Trump", etc.
It's a very simple question with a very simple answer. Liberals just don't want to say it out loud.
Plenty of people have given honest and serious replies, you are just ignoring those.
How many government leaders in this world have non-government followers that keep them in governmental power through force of small arms in spite of the government?
Plenty of bad leaders have their sympathizers, both civilian, government officials, police, and military. There is absolutely no one who can take over a country and control people all on their own. I just listed an example where in a public and filmed forum, a person asked a relatively prominent Republican figure when it was going to be times to start using guns. If Donald Trump (or whoever) started asking people to take up arms do you not think he would have at least a significant percentage of his supporters who would do it? Especially if they blame the other side for how their lives have turned out? Of course they would. Propaganda is a powerful thing and this country is filled with propaganda.
ETA: Nazi Germany started killing and raiding Jewish homes before they banned guns, but seeing as Jews in Germany at that time were a small population, there was nothing they could do about it even if they had guns. This whole idea of an armed populace being able to stop an authoritarian government is a complete hypothetical. Do you really think Jews could have defeated the Nazi military if they had guns? Of course they couldnt have. The biggest thing that leads to authoritarian takeover is the propaganda and ability to convince parts of your population, that another part of your population is your enemy. I think when we look back at Hitler and people like him, we forget that at the time, he had the support of many civilians who were either complacent, or even agreed with him about the Jews.
Another quick example. When John Brown started trying to free slaves, he was defeated by the US military pretty quickly and easily. And it isnt really debatable that the US at the time was authoritarian when it came to black people and slavery, and a well armed group of civilians was defeated quite easily. He wasnt trying to take down the government per se, but he was trying to fight against certain injustices, and the government beat him easily.
Last edited:
Slaves barely had food to eat, where were they getting guns?
Have you read a history book? Slaves were brought over from Africa by heavily armed Europeans and immediately thrust into a life of slavery and servitude. They were suppressed as a human being from the minute their tribal warlord in Africa captured them and sold them to the Europeans.
Where then would they have the capacity to arm and organize a rebellion to slavery?
Slaves were essentially prisoners and treated as property. It’s not thought provoking at all.
Being armed doesnt guarantee you win, especially if the other side is even better armed.
A thought provoking question? I swear this board continues to discover new, un-tapped depths of stupidity.
It’s a cute thought to think owning a personal weapon is a check on the government, but in reality the government has billion dollar weaponry technology that they have been enhancing for decades with bloated budgets that isn’t available to the general public. Realistically a government overthrow is logistically impossible solely by use of weapons.
This way of thinking way basically rendered moot given that cavemen with AK47s just ran the US out of Afghanistan
Similar threads
