little too late for that already, but it would be futile anyway.
the police don't need an arms cache to impose their abuses of the law. the most dangerous metal they own is pinned to their shirts.
This is not a sentiment I expected from you.
If you and I agree that the police are currently more corrupt than not .. would it not be simple prudence to seek the erasure of their access to better weapons? This nation was built on a principle of distribution of power. It frustrates the centralizers, slows their consolidation of an authoritarian state from the rot of the Republic. What finer way to jam a broomstick into the spokes of the empire builders than for you and me to have the same
standing as a police officer? Why do you think I stress that the police are civilians? I would like to at least slow their being transformed into Your Total Security Solution, one that will ultimately treat dissent as a disease state as Your Total Conformity Solution ... and the best way to do that, and to underline the value of the individual, is to use the Second Amendment as intended. Lots of distributed guns (not disabled by puny magazines, a central registry, chambering limitations
etc.) can interfere with and even unmask power grabs swaddled in the camouflage of acts of compassion. Of course, with three of four polled Americans speaking in favor of a national gun registry, I fear the cause is already lost. They've already taken you down, since you declare that you bought the most insidious message of all:
guns, ewww. cn