Is there any contradiction between gun rights and military spending? (enemy, money)

[bmw335xi]

I'm posing this question because I have noticed recently many people around me supporting no limits on gun rights. Their main reason is to protect ourselves in case our government becomes the enemy. However, these same people are also against cutting military spending. In fact, many of them are in favor for increasing military spending.

I'm interested in hearing your opinions, is there any contradiction here?



Disclaimer: I am pro gun rights and I own guns, but I believe there should be universal back ground checks.

[shooting4life]

I think military spending is too high (abrams tanks that sit without tank crews) in some areas and too low in others (always need more money for r&d, with appropriate oversight).
Military spending and gun rights have nothing to do with each other.

[cometclear]

Originally Posted by shooting4life

I think military spending is too high (abrams tanks that sit without tank crews) in some areas and too low in others (always need more money for r&d, with appropriate oversight).
Military spending and gun rights have nothing to do with each other.

Most coups have been perpetrated by a nation's military. The 2nd Amendment to our Constitution was created to protect against this very event from happening. This is also why there was opposition to having a standing army. The problem is that many of you military fetishists simply could not be made to choose between your gun and your military fetishes, so you'll pretend this obvious contradiction of fearing the government, yet supporting a huge standing army does not exist.

Thank you, OP, for bringing this up. They have no credibility.