Greentext

4410 readers

1483 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

Anon is often crazy.
Anon is often depressed.
Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

688

Anon explains the 2nd amendment (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

132 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

What you have is shitty slogans and zero thought. You're a trumpet for NRA propaganda and you're too dumb to even realise it.

The whole "security for liberty" shit you're referring to? Actually means the exact opposite of what you're trying to say.

https://www.npr.org/2015/03/02/390245038/ben-franklins-famous-liberty-safety-quote-lost-its-context-in-21st-century

SIEGEL: So far from being a pro-privacy quotation, if anything, it's a pro-taxation and pro-defense spending quotation.

WITTES: It is a quotation that defends the authority of a legislature to govern in the interests of collective security. It means, in context, not quite the opposite of what it's almost always quoted as saying but much closer to the opposite than to the thing that people think it means.

Now which is a more real risk to the collective security of Americans, daily mass shootings or some fantasy where the government is "coming to take muh guns" and you end up living in some hills fighting a guerrilla fight against a military made up of your fellow nationals?

Gee, idk, should we ask the kids who survived Sandy Hook how they feel about it? (They're old enough to vote now.)