As a legitimate sports hunter, I agree 100% with fisherman. Does anyone rationally think a rag tag citizens militia armed with conventional firearms would stand a change against any modern army equipped with artillery pieces with ranges up to 10 miles, also equipped with air craft, bombs, tanks, drones, would stand a snowballs chance in hell?
But maybe point granted, it somewhat possible as the US military and other governments have lost to insurgents in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. But still its a NRA fallacy in the USA, to stand a chance as an insurgent movement anywhere, you have to be popular with the local population, and earth to NRA, you and your totally nutty crapola is becoming less and less popular in the USA each and every day. When we have both an exponential domestic rise in gun violence in the USA, and the NRA stupidly opposes any measures that could reduce the number of firearms in the hands of total nuts and criminals. With total NRA nuts often now the definition of the current NRA nuts who want to be able to conceal and carry so they can be a vigilante mob member like George Zimmerman and slay a 16 year old kid armed with only a box of candy and a soft drink.
As the fellow I 100% disagree with is. " sm625 who says, "Every 15 minutes a violent crime is prevented by guns. 99+% of the time the gun is never discharged."
As I call it a bogus statistic and pure NRA fiction. As I call for an iota of proof from sm625.
Sometimes I can't tell if people posting things like this
really think things through before posting. Lets think about this a little more:
1. Things get so bad in the US that the US Fed leadership either decides to start attacking citizens/States, or, a reversal, the citizens/States decide to make a little trip to DC and straighten things out.
2. In either case, what the Fed defense would be composed of are Federal troops, and, any civilians and State people loyal to their cause.
3. The problem is, very large %'s of, and I'd say, the majority of, those Federal troops - and for certain our officer core - have zero love for DC.
4. So, what you are saying, and what you are banking your argument on, is that these Fed troops, who are in large part compromised in large %'s of people who would have been, and would be, living in times that are so bad it's come to the point of the few Fed vs. Everyone else, that the Fed troops as you view them now would somehow - insanely - be more loyal to the Fed Leadership rather than the own civilian population they themselves are from, have friends and family in, and in large %'s, would support over the Fed itself.
5. Given this, you still think that these highly compromised Fed units, who may or may not have reliable and/or effective access to these more powerful instruments of war (due to the highly compromised Fed millitary that in all likelyhood, would in no way go attack the same citizenry they're part of), are then somehow going to effectively reform, rearm, and then go fight citizenry that a.) massively outnumbers them, b.) is armed to various degrees (from those same jets, helicopters, tanks, vehicles, and armaments), and would in fact have large numbers of the same highly trained Fed troops that have in fact become patriots to their new cause.
6. You think that'd go well...so well in fact, that you think it's pointless for citzens to be armed with weapons that would make the remaining Fed troops more than just a little wary of doing things like, oh, getting out of their tanks, troop carriers, Humvees, getting into their airplanes, helis, or even, like, living at above ground/lightly defended bases.
Alrighty then...
Facebook
Twitter