Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How We Learned to Love the Bill of Rights

bunkhistory.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 111 posts

Re: How We Learned to Love the Bill of Rights

#81

Post by arca_vorago »

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #10
flossball wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Supreme Court loves to ignore the ninth. Somehow the fourth amendment is about convenience now? If we aren't detained or delayed, the government can copy, search, and scan anything they want. It appears the third now too is gone and the government can do what it wants on your land without permission or compensation.

It appears the third now too is gone and the government can do what it wants on your land without permission or compensation. I'm pretty sure that the United States government has not been forcing anyone to house soldiers. https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amen...

Actually, this is one of my main retrospective concerns with the tactics we were using in Iraq and I assume Afghanistan. We would literally take over some random families complex at night and dig in for the fight come morning. It was sop, but it wasn't till after I got out and thought to myself, hey that seems like a violation of the 3rd amendment even if it's in another country during a time of war.

Re: How We Learned to Love the Bill of Rights

#82

Post by natecavanaugh »

kelnos wrote: post #52
danjayh wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what scares me about the current attitude (nationally) towards gun control. The right to bear arms is a basic civil right, unambiguously encoded in the Bill of Rights alongside speech, assembly, religion, due process, etc. Throughout history, taking away weapons has always been an early step down the slippery slope to totalitarianism and stripping the populous of their other rights. Just because it's unlikely…

Let's talk in practical terms for a second, though. Do you truly believe that gun ownership in the US could result in a bunch of citizens overthrowing the US government should it become tyrannical? I just don't see it happening. The US military is far too well-trained and -armed, and of course a hypothetical tyrannical US government would turn the military against its citizens if there was an armed uprising. And they…

I think there's also a very subtle line here as well in that guns don't necessarily have to defeat the military, but that guns can help protect citizens against corrupt local government. This happened during the civil rights era, in that armed African Americans were able to prevent attacks in many cases or even just police brutality simply by the presence of guns in the hands of the victims.

I think a complete government meltdown is often used as the defense for gun ownership, but given how our government is structured (more control given to states and local communities while trying to balance it with centralized power in the federal government), guns can help keep order when in the hands of citizens.

Of course, like the constant balance of local and centralized government, we will forever need to balance the rights of individuals vs. the safety of the collective.

Re: How We Learned to Love the Bill of Rights

#83

Post by direfungasaur »

zaroth wrote: post #77
direfungasaur wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you implying that gun-owners would suddenly wage war on the nation if they were told to hand over (some portion of) their guns in the next year or face civil penalties? Doesn't it seem far more likely that most law-abiding folks would hand over their weapons to avoid interruption to their lives, possibly retaining one or two illegally? Most of the people I know would complain and protest any confiscation, but I d…

Gun confiscation from law-abiding citizens at a Federal level? Yes, I believe that has a pretty significant chance of going sideways quite rapidly. Target a vulnerable sub-population and you just might be able to pull it off (mentally impaired, under 21, etc.)

I just don't understand the generality of the assertion. Law-abiding folks are suddenly going to become violent because the government changed one law? I can certainly believe that some segment of the population might revolt, but broad-scale revolt seems rather unlikely. Most of us are well-fed and entertained enough that the loss of firearms would be an irritant, not an issue worth risking life and limb over. Something like prohibition seems far more likely. Some folks would retain whatever weapons were deemed illegal, while the vast majority of folks would hand-over the bulk of their weapons and possibly retain whatever they thought they could conceal.

Re: How We Learned to Love the Bill of Rights

#84

Post by ionised »

rvo wrote: post #65
rgbrenner wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Afghanistan. 16 years, still haven't won. And us citizens have more weapons than the taliban; longer harder to protect borders than Afghanistan; and a population that would be sympathetic to the cause. I wouldn’t be so sure the us military would win. According to current military doctrine[0], counterinsurgency requires a minimum of 1 counterinsurgent per 50 people in the population. If you assume ALL us military pers…

Also, 99 percent of the US military will defect to protect their own country against a rogue federal government. These are normal, good people who signed up to protect us.

Are you sure about that?

History shows us that typically, soldiers will fight for whoever guarantees their pay.

Combined with this;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

it shows that money, orders and chain of command are powerful motivators.

These are normal, good people who signed up to protect us.

I wouldn't put that number anywhere near 99%. Probably closer to 50%. Maybe even lower.

I'm sure the people in any given totalitarian regime once thought the same way about their armed forces.

Re: How We Learned to Love the Bill of Rights

#85

Post by zaroth »

direfungasaur wrote: post #83
zaroth wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gun confiscation from law-abiding citizens at a Federal level? Yes, I believe that has a pretty significant chance of going sideways quite rapidly. Target a vulnerable sub-population and you just might be able to pull it off (mentally impaired, under 21, etc.)

I just don't understand the generality of the assertion. Law-abiding folks are suddenly going to become violent because the government changed one law? I can certainly believe that some segment of the population might revolt, but broad-scale revolt seems rather unlikely. Most of us are well-fed and entertained enough that the loss of firearms would be an irritant, not an issue worth risking life and limb over. Someth…

I think there’s a sizable part of the population which believes very strongly that what would come after gun confiscation is worth fighting a war to prevent.

And you can’t fight that war if you aren’t armed for it. So it’s a do or die / back up against the wall proposition at that point.

Men rise up in violence all the time to protect what is sacred to them. “Change one law” is I think not an accurate depiction of the premise I was responding to - which was repeal of the 2nd amendment and large scale gun confiscation.

Re: How We Learned to Love the Bill of Rights

#86

Post by TheCoelacanth »

quantumleap22 wrote: post #78
gnode wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to wonder whether gun ownership is preventing totalitarianism government when the will of the people to resist or even recognise authoritarianism is lacking. As a European, facts such as the incarceration rate of the US being second only to the Seychelles strike me as oddly dystopian.

The incarceration rates of Europeans in America are similar to those of Europeans in Europe.

If by Europeans, you mean white, then that isn't true. The US incarcerates whites at the rate of 450 per 100k which is roughly double the rate of any European country except for Russia and equal to Russia's rate. It's triple or more the rate of incarceration in most of Western Europe.

If you are referring to people who are actually from European countries, then I haven't seen data on that, but Europeans in the US would be a very small non-representative sample of Europeans, so I fail to see the relevance.

Re: How We Learned to Love the Bill of Rights

#87

Post by craftyguy »

forgotmypw wrote: post #55
kelnos wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's talk in practical terms for a second, though. Do you truly believe that gun ownership in the US could result in a bunch of citizens overthrowing the US government should it become tyrannical? I just don't see it happening. The US military is far too well-trained and -armed, and of course a hypothetical tyrannical US government would turn the military against its citizens if there was an armed uprising. And they…

In my opinion, it is not about overthrowing the government, it is about a right to self-defense. Not just from the government, but also from your average criminal. It's true that a citizen or even a group of citizens is no match for the military. But the difference is between citizens being able to try defending themselves, and being completely defenseless. It is the difference between soldiers being ordered to fire…

> Not just from the government, but also from your average criminal.

And yet the US has one of the highest homicide rates for developed countries in the world, while sporting the highest (by far) firearm per capita in the world.

So something with that nice argument you, and others, have is not working.

Re: How We Learned to Love the Bill of Rights

#88

Post by craftyguy »

the_trapper wrote: post #67
kelnos wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's talk in practical terms for a second, though. Do you truly believe that gun ownership in the US could result in a bunch of citizens overthrowing the US government should it become tyrannical? I just don't see it happening. The US military is far too well-trained and -armed, and of course a hypothetical tyrannical US government would turn the military against its citizens if there was an armed uprising. And they…

I wouldn't count on the US military necessarily siding with a tyrannical government that has stripped its populace of its Constitutional rights. Here's the Oath of Enlistment with a few points of emphasis: I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic ; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and t…

As someone who formerly served in the US military, you would be hard pressed to find anyone in it that still remembered the oath they took, much less nuanced details like what you pointed out, while half asleep at MEPS that one fateful day after hours of testing and medical prodding.

Re: How We Learned to Love the Bill of Rights

#89

Post by mr_spothawk »

kelnos wrote: post #52
danjayh wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what scares me about the current attitude (nationally) towards gun control. The right to bear arms is a basic civil right, unambiguously encoded in the Bill of Rights alongside speech, assembly, religion, due process, etc. Throughout history, taking away weapons has always been an early step down the slippery slope to totalitarianism and stripping the populous of their other rights. Just because it's unlikely…

Let's talk in practical terms for a second, though. Do you truly believe that gun ownership in the US could result in a bunch of citizens overthrowing the US government should it become tyrannical? I just don't see it happening. The US military is far too well-trained and -armed, and of course a hypothetical tyrannical US government would turn the military against its citizens if there was an armed uprising. And they…

> Do you truly believe that gun ownership in the US could result in a bunch of citizens overthrowing the US government should it become tyrannical?

no. it's not about overthrow. it's about meaningful #resistance in the face of braindead authoritarian pepperspray cops without the spine to think for themselves.

gun owners aren't at the range practicing political science, and international business, and and learning to be lawyers (though some probably are)...

they're protecting their inalienable right to resist authoritarians

Re: How We Learned to Love the Bill of Rights

#90

Post by throwahey »

kelnos wrote: post #52
danjayh wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what scares me about the current attitude (nationally) towards gun control. The right to bear arms is a basic civil right, unambiguously encoded in the Bill of Rights alongside speech, assembly, religion, due process, etc. Throughout history, taking away weapons has always been an early step down the slippery slope to totalitarianism and stripping the populous of their other rights. Just because it's unlikely…

Let's talk in practical terms for a second, though. Do you truly believe that gun ownership in the US could result in a bunch of citizens overthrowing the US government should it become tyrannical? I just don't see it happening. The US military is far too well-trained and -armed, and of course a hypothetical tyrannical US government would turn the military against its citizens if there was an armed uprising. And they…

So you are suggesting we just accept enslavement? Can you explain to me how that isn't stockholm syndrome? I'm sorry but even if the odds are zero, I among many others would rather go down fighting to protect our liberties. These are rights given to us by our creator, not government.

We should not need to rely on the morals of the military.

Post reply on HN