- Apr 20, 2012
- 3,973
- 72
- 91
premise of a large military able to crush every rebellion?
That's not what I said.
What I said is, that
a) if your insurrection reaches critical mass, it doesn't matter if everyone has guns
b) if it doesn't reach critical mass, the military will resist you, as will all the other armed citizens.
An insurrection where everybody has guns will only be more bloody, not necessarily more successful.
And again, look at Libya. How would additional hand guns have helped the rebels? I asked this before, but no answer was forthcoming. What enabled this revolution was western air support and air superiority.
Revolutions work by first destabilizing the economy, which then destabilizes the government in the long term. Disobedience is the key, not killing "the enemy".
I also find it intriguing, that many here expect the military not to fire back, but keep guns with the express purpose of shooting their own countrymen. If you are okay with shooting fellow citizens (that's what those guns are for, after all) how can you realistically expect that the military will not do the same? This logic appears flawed to me.