Is this poltical irony?

[OtterMan68]

Right wing: The Second Amendment keeps us free!

Also the right wing: We're living under a dictatorship!

Yes

No

[MisterWack]

Political Irony is attacking Biden for cognitive decline, classified document stealing, and guilty son.

Then once he is out of the picture to defend your civilly liable rapist, cognitive declining weirdo, 300+ classified document stolen, and he is guilty himself for 34 counts of falsifying business records to get a reimbursement for a “legal expense” which in reality was reimbursement for paying off a Pornstar.

Guess what, Kamala Harris isn’t Joe Biden. We got rid of our criminal, you are a hypocrite for keeping yours.

[MisterWack]

*Former Trump Supporter

[Anonymous]

I don't see the contradiction? You can be free under a dictatorship so long as the dictator is too scare of you to do anything. Being well armed does limit a dictators options

[OtterMan68]

then how did the dictator come to power?
Can you cite an example of a dictator who was too scared to be a dictator because of an armed population? Wouldn't the dictator have the military on his side plus a portion of the population?

[Opinion Owner]

@otterman68
A dictator simply needs to secure control of the goverment in certant key cities, not the whole population.
Most of of our population by contrast would live thousands of miles away and the dictator has little need to send his relatively few loyal solders to try and control or repress them.

As the cost of maintaining such a force in all such distant locations far exceeds any benefit they might get from such control. The economics of such control really only works out when there is enough to gain from such control to be worth the cost of enforcing it.

A city is relatively inexpensive as your talking about a relatively small area that a few loyal people can patrol to terrorize into submission a large number of people who generally would be able to provide a significant amount of resources to support the state.

But you get out into smaller towns further out into the country and your needing more and more people simply because the sheer scale of distance that has to be controlled to control an ever smaller taxable population.

This is where the economics of tyranny breaks down.
If you arm any population and that just significantly reduces cost/benefit ratio even further by dramatically raising the level of equipment and training required of your security forces to control any given population.

So realistically in tyranny depending on how much of the population supports the tyrant. The tyrant will generally just focus on controlling key cities. Leaving the rest of the country side mostly free, how much depends on how heavily armed that population is.

[OtterMan68]

All he needs is the military on his side and half the population

[Opinion Owner]

@otterman68 If he has half the population he will have a military on his side. That still won't make it cost effective to control all of America.

You need to understand most cases of compliance with the law even with all of today's police cooperating is voluntary, particularity as you get into smaller population density areas where the nearest LEO is even more out of reach even with all of America.

This is why Rural people like guns, ultimately they are the only real law enforcement when it matters.

At the same time the fact that they have guns just means that if you were to try and control them means you need to invest even more resources in having technical or numerical superiority out there.

This is fine if there are only a tiny number of such people and the neighbors were generally cooperative. But anymore than that and your looking at spending many times what you get out of the region just to control it.

That is very difficult to justify over the long run, and can in fact bankrupt your country, Not unlike Afghanistan a small Texas sized country of which we really only controlled a few cities.

Granted if it is our own home we might be willing to continue such a war indefinably, but that still is a long way from being able to afford that kind of control.

[OtterMan68]

there's no examples of a dictator with no power if he controls the military

[Opinion Owner]

@otterman68
Such a dictator would have power, and if he wanted to could impose what he wanted on what areas. But practically would not do so because it cost too much and undermines his control in other more valuable locations.

[Agape93]

Yeap

My favorite irony is

Right wing: party of small government and keeping the government out of our lives!

Also right wing: hey let's force rape victims of all ages to give birth and use state, local and federal manpower to enforce it

[DrPepper12]

Allow me to introduce exhibit A:

.

[legalboxers]

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Jne9t8sHpUc

this

[gatixek710]

Wait so you want us to take over the government or not?

[exitseven]

It is irony , until it isn;t.

[beefcakebradybatson]

Righties are full of ish.