see. this is why her statement was dangerous.because in our modern times, with the multiple options for recourse available to us, taking up arms against the government is unacceptable.are you purposefully ignoring that she said she would use her gun against the government if it decided her rights were not important? if you aren't, what type of scenario do you think she had in mind when she said that?no, that's exactly what she said.
so if the government takes her house under imminent domain, would that be the government deciding that her rights weren't important?
see, we have her stating that it's okay to use guns against the government if the government feels your rights aren't important. what we don't have from her is what she believes that would mean.
either way, to the cliven bundys out there, this is exactly what they want to hear. it's validation for their armed resistance to the government. tell me how encouraging that kind of behavior is responsible
"I believe in the right to defend myself and my family"
YOU are adding all of this into it, all she said was defend.
Sorry.
Not sure why you find that so alarming. It is the purpose of the 2nd amendment after all.
No it's not. When politicians are no longer to be trusted to follow the Constitution and your vote no longer counts you have no choice. In fact it's your duty as an American to put things right.