Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
andy jackson and some squirrel hunting irregulars put the british army (the most powerful and sophisticated force on the planet) on their heels.
[video=youtube;50_iRIcxsz0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50_iRIcxsz0[/video]
So how about banning all semi-automatic weapons?
- Thread starter canndo
- Start date
[video=youtube;50_iRIcxsz0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50_iRIcxsz0[/video]
PeyoteReligion
Well-Known Member
I don't feel safe going up against a tank with my AK any day of the week. It's a different world we live in than it was back in 1814. The point you are trying to make isn't even relevant anymore. If we tried to revolt like we did against the British, they would be rolling tanks to our doorstep and hitting us with drones. Like we have even a slight chance of victory. Sadly our right to bear arms to revolt against an unjust govt is now just a ruse. The govt is too powerfull militarily for a homeland revolt nowadays.
Saltrock
Active Member
I do consider it true, but I don't think it is acceptable that someone can have prudently, responsibly owned the gun, and still the gun could have been taken for misuse. I think when you have an object that has the potential to cause great harm, the gun owner should take the highest precautions to prevent that. Even if that means continually changing the combo on a safe, or not having a key accessible to the household. If a gun owner is negligent in properly storing their guns, and it ends up in a shooting spree, their should be some accountability. In this case the mom got held to highest form of accountability.
If you are a gun owner and you are on vacation and someone brakes into your home and steals your cache of guns, you should alert the police how many guns got stolen and the vin numbers of all the guns immediately. If you are a legal gun owner those number should be available in a database anyway. But this just notifies the police that these guns are out on the street and if they end up in a crime, you did your due diligence to report them stolen.
Also if you sell someone your gun without notifying the authorities and it ends up in a crime , you should be held accountable in some way.
I think if we address this issue on many fronts such as mental illness, stricter owner responsibility, stricter purchasing requirements, and possibly and I hate saying this, but maybe we do need more security at schools. I think it should be a police officer and not a teacher or principle. We might see less incidents. Although I don't totally buy the fact the criminals only target gun free zones or that more guns = less crime.
Peace
Salt
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
i disagree. tanks are designed to battle fixed fortifications and other tanks. they7 are big juicy targets in a guerilla war.
aircraft are only effective if you have a target, drones are used to great effect because the target gets ratted out by a squimper.
the military would revolt or mutiny if ordered to make war on it's own people for the goals of some politiacl movement or a military junta.
the goverment is only as powerful as WE let it be. and submission never overthrew a tyrant.
when you decide to face a tank with small arms you should NOT FEEL SAFE EVER. shit anytime you take up arms you shouldn't feel safe. safe is for the capitutlators and those who surrender rather than stand up for their convictions.
do you think Washington felt "safe" standing with his ragtag band of irregulars against the british army and their german mercenaries?
do you think Audie Murphy or Alvin York felt "safe"?
safe is for cowards and pansies. i'd rather be victorious than safe.
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
guns arent nuclear weapons or bottles of anthrax. you may not LIKE thats theres a chance somebody might acquire a gun and do harm,, but thats no excuse for demanding those of us who arent afraid to disarm. safety is an illusion, and even if you could make all guns in the world vanish with a wave of your magic wwand,, knives clubs brick and pointed sticks will still be there to menace you and haunt your nightmares.
i for one wouldnt stand for turning the schools into armed camps for the cops and their snitches. rentacops are just as untrustworthy as regular bought and paid for cops, and this would merely instill a sense of fear and a habit of submission in the youth who must march past armed "Lawer Infurcemint Offisers" and pass through metal detectors and dope sniffing dogs every day "for their safety"
in my opinion this habit of submission is the REAL reason for these measures since they have all proven ineffective at preventing violence.
safety is still an illusion.
Saltrock
Active Member
So does that mean if we don't have a shot at winning against the military foreign or domestic we should be not armed with adequate guns? That really is the only thing that sways my decision on whether we should be able to have guns like AKs to protect ourselves if shit hits the fan. Other then that I see no reason to have such dangerous weapons.
Peace
Salt
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
shit hitting the fan is exactly why we are not only allowed, but REQUIRED to own adequate military arms and ammunition. (militia act 1792, and dick act 1903)
not just to defend against our own government but if need be to DEFEND our government and it';s constitution form foreign threats.
the power and prestige of US military forces has reduced the perceived importance of the militia as national defense, but it remains as it always has been, the primary reason for the 2nd amendment.
at the time there was a strict prohibition on maintaining a standing army. and that has NOT changed. the US army coast guard and air force are illegitimate unconstitutional bodies established in a direct affront to the constitution.
only the navy and marine corps (limited to two divisions) are authorized anywhere in the constitution, but the courts and the legislature pretend the army airforce coast guard, and national guard are the militia. this is false.
our constitution still prohibits a standing army and in fact any military force beyond the navy and the marine corps.
PeyoteReligion
Well-Known Member
Yea we can't win that fight, but I still wanna keep my guns. Just being realistic. They could blast me with a tank/artillery unit from farther than I can see from my house, if I were deemed a target. And an air strike would come faster than I could wipe my ass. We don't even have radar like the govt does. That alone would puts civilians at a huge disadvantage if it came to that. I don't think it will get to that though. Again just saying, even an organized malitia probably couldn't even take on a swat team along side the local police with shoot to kill orders, let alone the military. Let's be realistic here guys.
Saltrock
Active Member
So what is your solution? Just roll with the punches, what ever happens, happens? I don't suggest , nor do I think it is a reality that all guns can disappear. But I can't imagine inaction is better then action. I'd rather confront a guy with a knife or a pointed stick then a guy with a gun.
Peace
Salt
desert dude
Well-Known Member
What's even better is if you confront that guy with a knife and YOU have a gun.
Mr Neutron
Well-Known Member
That's terrible. I can't imagine NOT being able to imagine something.
fb360
Active Member
The military is employed by homelanders... The weapons are designed by homelanders as well. If the collective general population really wanted to overthrow the govt, we easily could. The only question is how many live will be lost in the process.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Show us how the U.S. kills it's share of one million of its own civilians every year. Numbers, graphs, recountings would help. And if you count rougue local police officers you are counting wrong.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
American exceptionalism!!!
Harry Reid, Diane Feinstein and John Boehner would never, NEVER I SAY, do anything evil. It is beyond comprehension that an American would be murderous. Such actions are only undertaken by the darkies.
canndo
Well-Known Member
You seem to have a rather faulty memory beyond the fact that you never did understand the point I was making. No, I did not call santorum a convicted pedophile, I said Romney was and it was in response to Romney's wholesale mismanagement of the truth. Post the quote or it didn't happen.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Yeah, never mind that the difference between those irregulars and british soldiers at the time was a few cannons and some outmoded tactics. Today the difference is, oh, I don't know, Cluster munitions, wire guided missiles, aircraft, satelites, advanced tactics, armor, artillery, hellicpoters. And those modern day squirel hunters have what exactly?
Still got this day dream that the US military has enough ordinance to use a tank, a few bombers and $40,000,000 worth of equipment and arms for each and every citizen resistance member. Yep, that's sustainable. Apparently you forgot the biggest obstacle to winning wars, running out of money.
Afghanistan has a population of 35 million mostly armed with goats and sticks, mostly uneducated. Yet the most mighty military ever conceived with all the satellites and weapons and money and armor, helicopters, jets, Marines, SEALS and everything else has not made a dent in 11 years. LOL and somehow they will be able to annihilate 10 times as many people spread out in a country 20 times larger and in a much more well armed state.
Keep dreaming.
canndo
Well-Known Member
It is an extraordinary jump from "show me where the U.S. is involved in the wholesale murdering of U.S. citizens" to "the government would never do anything wrong". And your statement goes exactly nowhere in providing proof of Cahrois's assertion.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Shall we start with the fact that Afghanistan was propped up and supplied with weapons long before we showed up? Or should we talk about the distances involved. If you think the equation is one tank one civilian then you don't really have much regard for this most powerful military jazz. What you ARE saying is blasphemy. Seems the viet cong, the afghani population and the civilians of the United States are all more powerful than the U.S. military.
You might want to let the rest of the right in on that revelation, I am sure they would be more than a bit interested - think of all the money we could save by simply disbanding our forces and sending bubba's 2nd underware brigade instead.
desert dude
Well-Known Member
Kind of like Syria, where Assad is expected to fold up his tent any day now?