And yet government agents shooting unsuspecting non-criminals in their own home, after mistaking the address or responding to a malicious fake emergency call, is a line that is only crossed in the country with the Second Amendment.

Yeah, plus they're practically the only country that hasn't had serious government threatening civil unrest for 160 years and they still brag about guns.

Heck, the only real recent unrest of that magnitude, the takeover of Capitol, was without guns as far as I remember. As in, no standoff.

>Yeah, plus they're practically the only country that hasn't had serious government threatening civil unrest for 160 years and they still brag about guns.

There was that miners strike which got bombed.

Do you mean this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army

Or something else? I guess that's the closest thing that would qualify.

But compared to the anti-government protests that have probably happened in half the countries in the world during the same time period, it's peanuts.

Example from Romania: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017%E2%80%932019_Romanian_pro...

Half a million people protesting out of ~18 million or so. For reference, that would mean 10 million people protesting at the same time in the US. I wonder if even the civil rights movement during the 60's ever got that many people out on the streets at the exact same time.

No, I meant this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain

I agree tho. In general the US is rather good at keeping down any kind of protests that pose an existential threat or undermines it's major goals.

>Heck, the only real recent unrest of that magnitude, the takeover of Capitol, was without guns as far as I remember. As in, no standoff.

Condescending to other countries with smug quips by the American founding fathers turns out to be much easier than taking those principles seriously on your own soil when facing the prospect of armed Federal police.