Gun sales at record levels
- Thread starter turkeyneck
- Start date
USSR worked because the people wanted change, not the govt. wanting to excert more control. Big difference, the populus wanted a change of govt. The ruling govt. was not trying to gain more control, they already had 100% control.
Also, it doesnt always work. How about China 1989, Tiannemen Square (sp). Rebellion was smashed to bits.
Would of been different if the military wanted to gain control that it didnt have. (they would take control first, by any means, then maybe listen to dissenters, after the control is in thier hands 100%)
The intial commentary of this thread was that people would arm themselves to protect themselves from an ever increasing domineering government. Thats non-sense and a fantasy. A head to head battle of force with a govt. will not work, that was my intial comment. Really the only thing that does work effectively, is that we vote for new Leaders every 4 years, never letting them get powerful enough to try any of this stuff.
In some ways i think we are trying to reach the same conclusion, just taking different roads.
Vote and get BArry out , haha
EF
On the net...
"I made a traffic stop on an elderly lady the other day for speeding
on U.S. 166 Eastbound at Mile Marker 73 just East of Sedan , KS.
I asked for her driver's license, registration, and proof of insurance.
The lady took out the required information and handed it to me.
In with the cards I was somewhat surprised (due to her advanced age)
to see she had a conceal carry permit. I looked at her and ask if
she had a weapon in her possession at this time.
She responded that she indeed had a .45 automatic in her glove box.
Something---body language, or the way she said it---made me want
to ask if she had any other firearms. She did admit to also having
a 9mm Glock in her center console. Now I had to ask one more
time if that was all. She responded once again that she did have
just one more, a .38 special in her purse. I then asked her what
was she so afraid of.
She looked me right in the eye and said, "Not a fucking thing!"
"I made a traffic stop on an elderly lady the other day for speeding
on U.S. 166 Eastbound at Mile Marker 73 just East of Sedan , KS.
I asked for her driver's license, registration, and proof of insurance.
The lady took out the required information and handed it to me.
In with the cards I was somewhat surprised (due to her advanced age)
to see she had a conceal carry permit. I looked at her and ask if
she had a weapon in her possession at this time.
She responded that she indeed had a .45 automatic in her glove box.
Something---body language, or the way she said it---made me want
to ask if she had any other firearms. She did admit to also having
a 9mm Glock in her center console. Now I had to ask one more
time if that was all. She responded once again that she did have
just one more, a .38 special in her purse. I then asked her what
was she so afraid of.
She looked me right in the eye and said, "Not a fucking thing!"
You are dead wrong because of the way you are looking at this. You seem to think that a bunch of people who all own guns have to sit there and go toe to toe with the military in which case they would be slaughtered.
The whole reason why Guerilla warfare works is because the army who is trying to shut down the citizenry has no clue who the innocent people are and who the people are that want to murder as many of them as possible. Sure the army/government could go through the entire country and wipe out EVERY SINGLE PERSON who is not with the army, but then what the fuck do they have left to govern? They would have to destroy the entire country and start from square one to work like that.
The fact of the matter is that when you have a well armed citizenry, it only takes 1 person to catch a bunch of army personnel by surprise and take 13 of them down(see Ft. Hood Massacre) while they go with them. This is the reason that we cant win in these backward countries like Iraq or Afghanistan, because so long as a person has a means to kill, and they are willing to die at the same time they can take out 10 of the people they are opposing with them, there is no way to stop them, besides wiping out the entire population.
I would have thought this would be obvious to any intelligent person who has watched how badly we have struggled to take out a bunch of people who still live in the stone ages in the middle east. The fact oif the matter is that when people think their very freedom is in jeopardy, they become willing to die for their cause, and you cant stop anyone who is well armed and willing to die for their cause, unless you are willing to wipe out an entire country.
So long as Americans are armed, America is ungovernable by the military, because at any time, an armed citizen can simply walk into a government building and start opening fire. The military has no way to determine who is actually with them and who is against them until it is to late, so the whole country becomes ungovernable. The people with guns do not need to wipe out the entire army, in order to win a war against the government, they just need to create a scenario where the country becomes ungovernable.
For the record, i have never owned or shot a gun, but what you are saying here is incredibly naieve. You seem to think that the pro gun people have this grandiose plan to one day stand toe to toe, 50 yards apart, just like in the days of the civil war and muskets, which everyone would concede is suicide.
The whole reason why Guerilla warfare works is because the army who is trying to shut down the citizenry has no clue who the innocent people are and who the people are that want to murder as many of them as possible. Sure the army/government could go through the entire country and wipe out EVERY SINGLE PERSON who is not with the army, but then what the fuck do they have left to govern? They would have to destroy the entire country and start from square one to work like that.
The fact of the matter is that when you have a well armed citizenry, it only takes 1 person to catch a bunch of army personnel by surprise and take 13 of them down(see Ft. Hood Massacre) while they go with them. This is the reason that we cant win in these backward countries like Iraq or Afghanistan, because so long as a person has a means to kill, and they are willing to die at the same time they can take out 10 of the people they are opposing with them, there is no way to stop them, besides wiping out the entire population.
I would have thought this would be obvious to any intelligent person who has watched how badly we have struggled to take out a bunch of people who still live in the stone ages in the middle east. The fact oif the matter is that when people think their very freedom is in jeopardy, they become willing to die for their cause, and you cant stop anyone who is well armed and willing to die for their cause, unless you are willing to wipe out an entire country.
So long as Americans are armed, America is ungovernable by the military, because at any time, an armed citizen can simply walk into a government building and start opening fire. The military has no way to determine who is actually with them and who is against them until it is to late, so the whole country becomes ungovernable. The people with guns do not need to wipe out the entire army, in order to win a war against the government, they just need to create a scenario where the country becomes ungovernable.
For the record, i have never owned or shot a gun, but what you are saying here is incredibly naieve. You seem to think that the pro gun people have this grandiose plan to one day stand toe to toe, 50 yards apart, just like in the days of the civil war and muskets, which everyone would concede is suicide.
Couldn't US citizens also band together in large numbers wanting real change?
True, although in this case the military remained fiercely loyal to the government AND of course the citizens were completely disarmed decades earlier. The Chinese military is also significantly more brain washed than US soldiers.
I wholeheartedly disagree, and remained unconvinced.
It certainly has before. The American and the French revolutions just for a couple of examples
No opposition from me here. In fact I've been a proponent of congressional term limits for as long as I can remember.
Interesting, well thought out post. Pretty good for ET, lol.
I have no argument against your post, rational and a possible scenario that could happen.
Guerilla warfare does work, but not all guerilla warfare is created equal. Some work well, some get obliterated, some break apart quickly. Many factors involved, who the opposition is, who makes the whole of the guerilla squads etc. See Polish resistance and French Resistance guerilla fighters in WW2. Same tactics, Same enemy, different reults. See Phillipino resistance fighters as well. Do you think they had something worthy to fight for??? Do you not think they were passionite??
I was speaking more of the Logistics of a combat engagement of armed citizens against a military style coup. The history books will tell you, it rarely goes well for you unless you are part of the military.
I think we agree on some points and disagree on others.
I will stand on my point that someone arming themselves with a an extra 9mm, to defend themselves from an opposing combat force is sheer lunancy. If your interest is that, you would be better off learning Ordanance Technology and Strategy to put explosives in key areas under the cover of night. You would live longer and be more productive.
The best "weapon" we have is to vote every 4 years, not to let any of these paid-politicians think they could ever try this.
At ease.
EF