Replace "gun" in your sentence with say "power tool." Any powerful piece of technology in careless hands is dangerous. Goodness, even computers are dangerous in the hands of narcissistic hackers! That doesn't mean they are not perfectly safe useful tools in the responsible hands.
Weld. Solder. Mill. Turn. Thickness plane. 90° Join. I can’t see even fairly impractical ways to do all those without power, let alone any practical way.
Article 3: Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 4: No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be
prohibited in all their forms.
I could continue pasting the remainder of the document, but I would argue that the ability to defend oneself (from the State, or other individuals) is the fundamental human right. Without it, all other rights are null and void. Gun ownership is the final fallback for securing our human rights.
The police have military weapons and the best equipment money can buy - especially SWAT. What good are “citizens” going to do against them?
That’s just like the militia running around in the woods training just in case they have to fight against the government. The same government that spends billions on weapons every year. If the government wants to impose martial law - like the nutcases including Chuck Norris thought they wanted to do a few years ago - the “militia” wasn’t going to be able to stop them.
Funny, it’s worked well in countries like Afghanistan. Don’t underestimate the power of a motivated and armed gorilla force that potentially exponentially outnumbers any “officially” sanctioned armed force.
> Funny, it’s worked well in countries like Afghanistan.
No, it didn't. The guerilla forces that were successful in Afghanistan has outside state sponsorship and supply and intervention by global or regional powers on their behalf (advisers, intelligence, special ops support, etc.) That's true of the Mujahideen fighting the USSR (backed by the USA, Pakistan, and others), and true of the Taliban/al-Qaeda associated groups which were fighting the internationally-recognized government (backed by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.)
This always comes up in the context of using guns to fight tyranny.
Your SWAT example is great: how many guys are on the SWAT team kicking the door to get one guy? 4? 6? 10?
What about an actual military operation going door to door? Squad size is 10? 20?
Government violence, when directed against you is nearly impossible to resist. But that's not the same as government violence directed against an armed populace.
History is flush with examples of failures of superior military power to subdue a population that actively resists.
Have you considered that the answer to systematic failures in the governance of the United States might be better fixed at a systematic level, rather than just arming everyone?
Individual citizens trying to fight cops with firepower is never going to work. Cops have much better equipment than you're going to have, and have the backing of the entire government.
Unless you're literally planning on staging a coup, arming yourself to fight cops is not a viable strategy.
On the other hand, if we disarm everybody, then we don't need to have such over-militarized cops either, and maybe we can finally get to a place where cops no longer automatically reach for their gun (or even carry one) and therefore stop routinely murdering citizens.
