Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
8. Boy, did they bury the lede on this one.
Fri Feb 5, 2016, 12:27 PM
Feb 2016
Recent evidence strongly suggests that a well-regulated militia is not necessary to the security of a free state. Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan, in their 2011 work “Why Civil Resistance Works,” have shown that attempts to overthrow tyrannical governments or to change their policies as well as attempts to repel armed invasion, are twice as successful when they are pursued non-violently than when they are pursued violently.


"Play the odds and abandon your rights," sounds really stupid -- because it is.

So, I guess this is the Controller talking point we'll be seeing for the next few years. Sort of a variation of the "you can't hope to compete with a modern military!" talking point becoming "you don't need to compete with a modern military." Of course, invaders and tyrants use guns; has the author bothered to inform them that their odds are improved 2:1 if they don't use guns?

No?

What gives?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»The Fatally Flawed Second...»Reply #8