A question for your wingnut friends / family:

[KnaveRupe]

Most all of us know at least one wingnut that we have to associate with, be they friend, co-worker, family member, whatever. And most of those wingnuts are, in all likelihood, second-amendment-gun-lovin'-N-R-Freakin'-A types. So here's a question you can ask them, not in a snarky way, but in a serious effort to get them to examine the horrors of the the current junta.

"If the second amendment exists to protect the citizenry from the abuses of the government, exactly what would the government have to do to cause you, personally to take up arms?"

At first, you will be greeted with blank stares, but keep after them. The power of the people to rise up through force of arms and defend themselves from tyranny is such a part of their mythology that they will be eventually forced to give you some kind of answer or risk their entire world-view.

So prod them.

Poke them.

Get under their skin and make them actually think about the following scenarios (and feel free to add your own):



Would they rise up to prevent the government from spying on its citizens without just cause?

Would they take up arms if government were to imprison its citizens,indefinitely, without due process?

If a cabal siezes control of the government through rigged elections, have we passed the point where they would be willing to use force?

When the government hands the treasury to their corporate cronies while weakening our national security, is it time to dust off the squirrel rifle and go up against the tanks?



The point, obviously, is not to foment actual revolution, but to use some political judo to turn their attention to what's actually going on. Therefore, present these as hypotheticals - don't get bogged down in arguments over whether the Bush regime is actually engaging in these processes. Make them decide whether the actions are ok, not whether * is justified in whatever actions he has taken. Keep it abstract.

At the very least, you will cut their legs out from under them for the next time you find yourself discussing gun control with them.

Enjoy.

[Freedom_from_Chains]

1. but in a serious effort to get them to examine

Stop right there, you have already exceeded their abilities.

[liberal N proud]

2. They would have to check with the talking points before they could respond

There is no way you could get straight answer from any of them. Except some stupid response like you are not patriotic or We are at war, Freedom isn't free and all that bull shit.

[tanyev]

3. If an evil commie librul government did all the things you mention,

then yes. But you know George Bush is a good man, a godly man. If he's doing any of that stuff, it's for our own good.


:sarcasm:

[Norquist Nemesis]

4. Yep! "If the Demoncats steal the vote and take Congress,

I'll take up my guns against the overthrow of my government!"

I can hear them now. (seriously)

[aikoaiko]

5. I think they would answer your direct questions like this....

Would they rise up to prevent the government from spying on its citizens without just cause?

Yes, but if our citizens are talking to suspected terrorists then there is good reason to spy on some of our citizens. I believe what * says.

Would they take up arms if government were to imprison its citizens,indefinitely, without due process?

Few if any citizens are imprisioned indefinately and even then its because they collaborated with suspected terrorists. I believe what * says.

If a cabal siezes control of the government through rigged elections, have we passed the point where they would be willing to use force?

Historically there has always been some election fraud but we go with what we end up with. Are you still whining about Gore in Florida? We won that. I believe what * says.

When the government hands the treasury to their corporate cronies while weakening our national security, is it time to dust off the squirrel rifle and go up against the tanks?

When hasn't the treasury been controled by the rich? Better them than the poor. Our economy is growing slowing. I believe what * says.


In short, you base the premise that would right wingers take up arms against an abusive .gov? They would answer yes, but they do not find the currect .gov abusive. While I am not ready to take up arms, your question reminds me how important our next candidate will be to US and the world.

[KnaveRupe]

7. That's why you need to keep it abstract.

Say: "I'm not talking about Bush! Why do you think I'm talking about Bush when I say all these things?! Do you think Bush is guilty of these offenses?"

Get them on the record that they would in fact find any ONE of these actions cause to start American Revolution v2.0 - then if you think they are worth trying to save, start sending them news reports that show that Bush is, in fact, doing not ONE, but ALL of these things.

Get them to tell you what it would take for them to put their second amendment money where there mouth is. Challenge their bubba-hood. Show them that the second amendment that they lvoe and cherish ain't worth dick if they are just going to make excuses to not have to use it. Accuse THEM of Chamberlain-like appeasement. Throw their own shitty wingnut rhetoric back at them.

And when they come back at you asking why YOU aren't taking up arms? Smile sweetly and remind them that THEY are the NRA members, not you...

[Ian David]

6. To Repukes, accidentally setting fire to an armed compound...

occupied by a crazy religious child-molester is sufficient cause to blow-up a Federal building in Oklahoma.