By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Ganoncrotch said:
o_O.Q said:

so governments should just be able to do whatever they want with their citizens, with no resistance if they become despotic?

Just in terms of something like a pistol VS US Gov equipment, just from an unmanned drone point of view

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism estimates the following cumulative statistics about U.S. drone strikes (as of 17 September 2017):[19]

  • Total strikes: 429
  • Total killed: 2,514 – 4,023
  • Civilians killed: 424 – 969
  • Children killed: 172 – 207
  • Injured: 1,162 – 1,749

As of January 2014, the U.S. military operates a large number of unmanned aerial systems (UAVs or Unmanned Air Vehicles): 7,362 RQ-11 Ravens; 990 AeroVironment Wasp IIIs; 1,137 AeroVironment RQ-20 Pumas; and 306 RQ-16 T-Hawk small UAS systems and 246 Predators and MQ-1C Grey Eagles; 126 MQ-9 Reapers; 491 RQ-7 Shadows; and 33 RQ-4 Global Hawk large systems.[1]

The Gov has literally thousands of Drones capable of murdering 10+ people per strike, from an altitude beyond what any of these civilian held weapons would ever hope to be able to reach or hit. That count there btw was in 2014... you imagine in the last 5 years they've not made more of them? Thousands more. Those strikes as well were in places thousands of miles from the US home soil, it would be so much easier for them to drone strike people within the same land mass as where the drones are made, would be like shooting fish in a barrel, but the fish in the barrel are all holding knives in their mouth, assured in holding them that they're safe from being shot from above.

Also will say... that's a crazy number of Children and Civilians killed by drones, those things must lose tons of sleep... oh yeah of course, they're unmanned murder machines. ugh.... taken from wiki "Leaked military documents reveal that the vast majority of people killed have not been the intended targets, with approximately 13% of deaths being the intended targets, 81% being other militants, and 6% being civilians" 13% the intended target... that's a lot of collateral damage.

what about the provisions in the constitution that speak of the need for militias to guard against government tyranny?

should that section of the constitution be ignored?

its in the law of the land that the citizens of the country should have the capacity to defend themselves from government encroachment