• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The 2nd Amendment and ICE

Will you use your right to bear arms as a citizen against ICE if they try to detain you?

  • Total voters
    7
VanceMack said:
Again...you are positing a stupid question based on your mindless assertion that ICE is evil and tyrannical and is targeting en masse US citizens.
Click to expand...
It is a hypothetical question. Nothing more.

If that hypothetical were true...and I'm not necessarily saying that it is...for the sake argument, what would you do?

Side note: I suspect you don't want to answer because you are either unsure or feel that your answer will have to be justified (as it should be). In any case, let's be honest about the fact that the Polls Section is rife with "mindless assertations" from the right that the conservative and/or MAGA pollster want to be answered as well. I, mean, c'mon man...if you didn't want to answer, you shouldn't have responded. Your non-response response feels like that MAGA chump who issued a boxing challenge and got called out for trying to weasel out of his own challenge.
 
RF667799 said:
Virtually everyone is an armed citizen.

What would you do?
Click to expand...
No, while there are many firearms out there in the US, a lot of them are owned by the same people who feel the need to have them to prevent the tyranny of the government being applied to them (or so they say). A Gallup poll noted that about 32% of Americans own firearms. I think you could raise that percentage a bit more, but not by much in reality.

I am not in that 32% anymore. Not practical to own, really. But some do feel (or at least they say they do) they could shoot someone from the government to protect their freedoms. So, my poll question is aimed at those folks. The ones who believe that the reason for the right to bear arms is to prevent the tyranny of the government. So, I put up a hypothetical instance where that might happen to see their responses.

I suspect that by "tyranny of the government" what they really mean to say is "the elected government that I don't agree with".
 
Jason Warfield said:
It is a hypothetical question. Nothing more.

If that hypothetical were true...and I'm not necessarily saying that it is...for the sake argument, what would you do?

Side note: I suspect you don't want to answer because you are either unsure or feel that your answer will have to be justified (as it should be). In any case, let's be honest about the fact that the Polls Section is rife with "mindless assertations" from the right that the conservative and/or MAGA pollster want to be answered as well. I, mean, c'mon man...if you didn't want to answer, you shouldn't have responded. Your non-response response feels like that MAGA chump who issued a boxing challenge and got called out for trying to weasel out of his own challenge.
Click to expand...
As a question it demonstrates why hypotheticals are useless. Lets say you stopped beating your wife...would you then take it out on your children?
 
OlNate said:
I thought the original intent of 2A was to be the last line of defence against a tyranny. What conditions would you suggest need to be in place before this mechanism is triggered? I'm not arguing, I'm asking. :)
Click to expand...
So if ICE agents attempt to arrest me I should pull my 9 and shoot them? That will get me killed. How is dying a defense against tyranny?
 
Loulit01 said:
So if ICE agents attempt to arrest me I should pull my 9 and shoot them? That will get me killed. How is dying a defense against tyranny?
Click to expand...

So, as i said, I'm asking, not arguing.

You good over there? Wanna take a stab at what I asked you, or....? :)
 
Jason Warfield said:
No, while there are many firearms out there in the US, a lot of them are owned by the same people who feel the need to have them to prevent the tyranny of the government being applied to them (or so they say). A Gallup poll noted that about 32% of Americans own firearms. I think you could raise that percentage a bit more, but not by much in reality.

I am not in that 32% anymore. Not practical to own, really. But some do feel (or at least they say they do) they could shoot someone from the government to protect their freedoms. So, my poll question is aimed at those folks. The ones who believe that the reason for the right to bear arms is to prevent the tyranny of the government. So, I put up a hypothetical instance where that might happen to see their responses.

I suspect that by "tyranny of the government" what they really mean to say is "the elected government that I don't agree with".
Click to expand...

Oh. You want to narrowly define "armed" for some reason, probably political narrative.
 
RF667799 said:
Oh. You want to narrowly define "armed" for some reason, probably political narrative.
Click to expand...

You sound oddly perturbed. I think that's misplaced. I mean, Trump is getting the left to see the value of 2A again. Isn't that a win? ;)
 
OlNate said:
You sound oddly perturbed. I think that's misplaced. I mean, Trump is getting the left to see the value of 2A again. Isn't that a win? ;)
Click to expand...

I'm not really all that concerned with left vs right gamesmanship.

The poster seemed to assume the only way to defend oneself is with a gun. That isn't true. So he could easily answer his own hypothetical, whether he personally owns a gun or not.
 
RF667799 said:
I'm not really all that concerned with left vs right gamesmanship.

The poster seemed to assume the only way to defend oneself is with a gun. That isn't true. So he could easily answer his own hypothetical, whether he personally owns a gun or not.
Click to expand...

His question is whether or not *you* would use 2A to defend *yourself* if ICE attempted to deport *you*. I think it's pretty much a yes or a no, and wouldn't you rather answer for yourself than allow him to do it for you?
 
OlNate said:
His question is whether or not *you* would use 2A to defend *yourself* if ICE attempted to deport *you*. I think it's pretty much a yes or a no, and wouldn't you rather answer for yourself than allow him to do it for you?
Click to expand...

I would like him to answer his own question.
 
OlNate said:
He voted in the poll. 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...

Okay, so he wouldn't resist being arrested by ICE without a warrant or even a pretense of due process. A bunch of protesters don't seem to agree with his passivity.
 
I think its an interesting question posed too narrowly. Personally, I am 100 pounds and don't own a gun, so its a moot question.
But lots of the anti-government crowd have been animated by events like Ruby Ridge- a case of government over reach to be sure. Now, we have ICE agents seizing people who are here LEGALLY and detaining them or sending them to a Gulag. Does this make ICE agents who follow orders evil? No. We know where the buck stops- and they are evil ,IMO! One would think that the, "Don't tread on me" crowd would demonstrate a wee bit of alarm.
 
VanceMack said:
Then the question is stupid on its face. The assumption would have to be that ICE is doing something illegal...engaged in tyranny...and NOT just trying to un**** the mess that the last piece of shit rat administration caused and the current crop of rat elected officials are exacerbating. To that end, I have no concern ICE is going to target me, and the question is stupid and dishonest.
Click to expand...

a group of unidentified masked guys roll up on you and attempt to take you

your reaction is what?

to roll over and give in?
 
Jason Warfield said:
Many on the right claim that the reason for the right to bear arms is to counter the tyranny of the government, it’s over reach.

This poll isn’t about rounding up illegals per se, but the government showing up at your door and rounding you up, because they thoughtk you are an illegal and/or harboring illegals even though you are a citizen.

So, if you are an armed citizen and the government is coming after you and yours without a warrant or even the pretense of due process…will you use your firearm against the tyranny of the government being aimed at you?

Remember, this is a popular argument for the 2nd Amendment: defending the people from the government’s tyranny.
Click to expand...
ICE is upholding US Immigration Laws that are in the constitution!

If they detained a fully legit US Citizen , it should take 3-5 business days AT MOST to prove you are American !

The DEMs/Biden/Obama illegally let MILLIONS of illegals in that where ineligible for Asylum in to America!
And now Trump is cleaning up that mess! And it's getting very messy ! This is all on the DEM's criminal leadership !
 
VanceMack said:
Curious question.

Follow on then...are you here illegally in your scenario?
Click to expand...
Since the OP says "rights as a citizen" in his question, I'm guessing in his scenario he would be here legally, as an American citizen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom