@mxtthxw

> The cause of Hitler was economics post WW1, which was clearly an absolute cluster fuck whichever way you spin it.

Yea, and? Doesnt change the fact that a lack of guns caused him to have a much easier time with all that he did

> What if Hitler came to power and it was predominantly his supporters who had the guns?

Thats why its so improtant to teach our kids that being a responsible adult includes being a gun owner, to ensure we dont have those sort of divides. The government is just a bunch of rules if the people arent in line with it.

> "I like guns' is as compelling argument as any, 'protection from tyranny' doesn't add up.

You have made no case to that end.. I mean your one argument was "there are bad people in govt".. yet Hitler was a pretty obvious counter argument to that and then your goal post moved to "Oh well give it time"... The truth is, while your right only time will tell, all the evidence so far suggests it has been an effective preventative against a hitler, and it doesnt take much common sense on top of the evidence to understand why a gun would be a deterrent to such things.

My guess is you are more intentionally blind to the narrative because your trying desperately to justify a bias rather than view the situation objectively. Not that your alone in that, we are all biased, but your logic just doesnt line up with the reality.