Americans have the will to resist because you have weapons. If you don't have a gun, freedom of speech has no power. (borders, guns)

[smittyjohnny38]

-- Yoshimi Ishikawa, Japanese author, in the LA Times 15 Oct 1992

[AeroGuyDC]

Sounds pretty accurate to me. The Founding Fathers intended the 2nd Amendment to be used to fend off tyranny, inside our borders or out.

[ovcatto]

Originally Posted by smittyjohnny38

-- Yoshimi Ishikawa, Japanese author, in the LA Times 15 Oct 1992

Old Yoshimi must have watched too many Kurisawa movies.

"Americans have the will to resist because you have weapons. If you don't have a gun, freedom of speech has no power."

Strange, in the history of this country the most profound acts of resistance to tyranny and the denial of freedom weren't fought by Americans with guns. In point of fact it was those with the guns who fought the hardest to deny the freedoms of those who nonviolently opposed them and won.

I hasten to add that since WWII it has been those who non-violently sought freedom who have consistently defeated those who welded a gun.

[stevo6]

Originally Posted by ovcatto

Old Yoshimi must have watched too many Kurisawa movies.

"Americans have the will to resist because you have weapons. If you don't have a gun, freedom of speech has no power."

Strange, in the history of this country the most profound acts of resistance to tyranny and the denial of freedom weren't fought by Americans with guns. In point of fact it was those with the guns who fought the hardest to deny the freedoms of those who nonviolently opposed them and won.

I hasten to add that since WWII it has been those who non-violently sought freedom who have consistently defeated those who welded a gun.

Its hard to evaluate what you say since the purpose of the 2nd amendment is to deter; ie. to create a non-event. Wasn't it Yamamoto who after his successful assault on Pearl Harbor, decided not to attack our mainland because "there is a rifle behind every blade of grass"? Thats the way its supposed to work.