I know why the 2nd amendment was written. There is no vast movement to nullify it. And the Federal government is not trying to turn local police forces into armies of occupation.
You live in California, and you don't think there is a huge push to eliminate militia worthy firearms?
The only thing I think of is that you have not been following the laws enacted in California for the last 40 years.
No crime has ever been documented in CA using a .50 BMG rifle. They are illegal because they are capable of defeating the armor on many APCs. They have never been used for it, so why worry that citizens are able to resist the military or modern State troops?
The exact wording on many laws and mandates restricts "military style" weapons, yet at the same time they say that the 2nd is for allowing a well-armed militia. The government payroll troops are not militia, they are reserves for the federal forces.
But my favorite is California defeating the US Constitution by enacting ex-post-facto laws. You could buy a firearm legally, but be thrown in jail for it later when a new law banned them, even if you didn't know about the new law. Felony. It's not just the 2nd Amendment that pisses off the government, but pretty much most of the Bill of Rights.
But these are just a fraction of the laws on the books now. These laws did not exist when I was 18.
This is not a conspiracy theory. These are documented actions in concert over a historically short interval.
You do know that the government can take your land and give to the wealthy today, right? It's happening all over the US. They took 10 acres from us so they could build $500k houses. They paid us under 10 cents on the dollar. The reasoning? The land was to be used for a park, and that use is worth less per acre. Guess what? They put houses on it. The park was located on another parcel taken from our neighbor. The park is 5 acres, so they acquired 20 acres at a heavy discount. Maybe far more? I only know about a fraction of the massive development now called Eastvale, California.
You only think you have rights today. You have rights only if they do not conflict with those who are wealthier than you.
Energy is the same way. Those who use the least amount of energy are being billed for alternative energy plans so the wealthy can continue to use even more energy, and soak up work-free dollar from investing in subsidized green energy companies.
So please, explain to me why somebody who makes $100k a year pays $15k for a cheap $25k EV, but somebody who makes $20k a year must pay $22,500? Then the upper class whines when income caps are put on it.
Is that how Green Energy is going to be sold? The poor pay more, the rich pay less?
