Comments by "Daily Wire Third Stringer" (@DailyWireThirdStringer) on "Shanghai's COVID-19 lockdown l GMA" video.

  1. 10
  2. Hm, if that's the case then why don't Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Iceland, Japan, or a number of other highly developed countries feel the need to arm themselves against a "tyrannical government"? In case you didn't know, they also happen to be the most prosperous societies on Earth. And they all have very strict gun laws. Maybe there's no need once the government actually works for the PEOPLE rather than the wealthy and the corporate elite? Also, who do you think we would be fighting if it got to that point? Personally, I cannot take anyone seriously who simultaneously believes the government could become "tyrannical" at any moment and that they need the means to defend themselves so as to (as Jefferson wrote) overthrow the government and establish a new one that fears the people, not dominates them (I'm totally on board with that, I lean towards anarchism) --- but who ALSO says that our military should be the most powerful in the world and that the bloated budget of $770 BILLION should be maintained or even increased year after year. Using history as our guide (the American Revolution, for example), who do they think the politicians or a dictator will use as his/her/their shield to remain in power? The MILITARY, of course. Did we already forget that it was the British army who defended their colonies in the Seven Years' War, and then when the colonies rebelled, that same military was used against them? You want the people who would potentially be defending a brutal dictator (the Commander-in-Chief) to have MORE sophisticated weapons and means of subjugation? Are you INSANE? Here at least the libertarians have an argument --- the gun-toting neoconservatives have no idea what they want in such a scenario. Hope the hearts of the people with the most firepower (our servicemen and women) are turned in our favor, I guess --- and there, I'm afraid to say, history is not on your side.
    5
  3. 1
  4. 1