Got me a little worried.

[Caustic Burno]

https://www.sfisd.org/cms/lib/TX0221532 ... _28_18.pdf

This makes it emotional no matter your political leanings.

 

[Bright Raven]

Anyone who thinks gun control laws work should take a look at Washington DC, NY, Chicago, and LA. Some of the strictest gun laws in the nation but they are probably the most violent places in the nation.

Doesn't matter this is an emotional issue.

Very emotional and very political. Seats in the legislature are going to be affected.

 

[wacocowboy]

Anyone who thinks gun control laws work should take a look at Washington DC, NY, Chicago, and LA. Some of the strictest gun laws in the nation but they are probably the most violent places in the nation.

Doesn't matter this is an emotional issue.

It is more like the American people are sheep and are being herded. You have a bunch of lies in the media getting the sheep emotional. Do away with the lies and you get the emotional factor out too. When I saw those kids talking after that shooting you could tell they were being fed they were like puppets and someone was pulling their strings.

 

[sim.-ang.king]

Death by a thousand pin pricks, has brought down even the most well equipped armies.
Japan had a chance to try, but they even knew the large number of armed citizens in this country was to much of a threat.
Read about how many hunting license were sold last year, to give you an idea of size.

Statistics can be skewed. 36.82 million issued in 2017, according to this graph.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/253 ... in-the-us/

Here seems to be a better representation. About 15.5 million licenses issued.
https://wsfrprograms.fws.gov/subpages/l ... 202017.pdf

Ok, so how many of those went to kids? To individuals that would be useless in war, ie unable to move quickly? These are also tags, permits, and licenses. So how many of these numbers are one person getting multiple tags/permits? And finally, how many of the almost 37 million wouldn't be interested in the fight or would be in favor of the government's position? Using that statistic is misleading. Talking the US fighting against a common enemy like the Japanese in WWII and fighting against brethren, such as the Civil War, is apples and oranges. I'm not saying that we won't see another civil war, I just don't know that it's going to be over AR-15 style guns.

How many people in the military today would be willing to kill there own people?
That's the thing, it's not about how many, but the idea of the unknown that keeps everyone at bay. Be it the government, or the people. Neither one knows what the other is capable of, and that's the way it will stay until there is a great imbalance in favor of either side.
Removing any large number of rifles will create this imbalance.

 

[pdfangus]

Let me pose this question: Do any of you own a drone equipped with a CRUISE missile? How about a shoulder mounted rocket launcher? A Howitzer even? Anyone on here have anything like that? No? The reality is that any one of the folks on here that have giant arsenals are still no match for any 5-10 man SWAT unit showing up at your house. If you can get a bunch of your buddies to show up, say 15 even, one well manned A10 Warthog will take care of you. Any hint of insurrection by anyone in the US can, and will, be easily snuffed out due to the military's MASSIVE, and literal, ability to outgun even the best armed and trained backyard militia. So while having a couple of AR-15's in the closet might make you feel safer at night, the reality is that they won't do squat.

Now, before you all start declaring me to be a communist, gun hating, SOB, understand that I feel like the outlawing of one type of gun, or the outlawing of one group of citizens from owning guns, is a dangerous step of government overreach that, even though well intentioned, will lead to possible severe consequences unforeseen. I'm just pointing out that no matter what you have at your disposal, they will have bigger and better and you're not getting out alive.

And those of you that don't believe we're getting close to 1984, Brave New World, Wall-e etc, think again. Our society is becoming one in which complacency is the key to happiness and we're more and more content to watch others do, and sit back to be spoon fed "happiness" content.

Cheers! :wave:

The first part is true and I have considered it before...
with this last part you nailed it.....

and the gun grabbers and the press have moved from talking about assault weapons to "semi-automatic weapons" that would include your 1911 as well as your Remington model 1100 or your Ruger 10-22

 

[Bestoutwest]

How many people in the military today would be willing to kill there own people?
That's the thing, it's not about how many, but the idea of the unknown that keeps everyone at bay. Be it the government, or the people. Neither one knows what the other is capable of, and that's the way it will stay until there is a great imbalance in favor of either side.
Removing any large number of rifles will create this imbalance.

We all know what the government is capable of. And I'll say it again. 5, 10, even 100 farmers armed with a .30-.06 or even an AR-15, are not match for an armed, outfitted and well trained group of soldiers with the government behind them. They might take the day, but the week, month or the year long struggle will not be theirs. Rifles aren't even in the same class as what the government has available. Again, I'm not advocating for throwing down our arms and succumbing to the will of the government. I'm arguing that the stockpile of arms in your corner isn't going to squat when the government decides to rain down the fury.

Also, your first question is one I don't even want to think about. That's a very, very scary thought. It should keep one up at night.

 

[Caustic Burno]

How many people in the military today would be willing to kill there own people?
That's the thing, it's not about how many, but the idea of the unknown that keeps everyone at bay. Be it the government, or the people. Neither one knows what the other is capable of, and that's the way it will stay until there is a great imbalance in favor of either side.
Removing any large number of rifles will create this imbalance.

We all know what the government is capable of. And I'll say it again. 5, 10, even 100 farmers armed with a .30-.06 or even an AR-15, are not match for an armed, outfitted and well trained group of soldiers with the government behind them. They might take the day, but the week, month or the year long struggle will not be theirs. Rifles aren't even in the same class as what the government has available. Again, I'm not advocating for throwing down our arms and succumbing to the will of the government. I'm arguing that the stockpile of arms in your corner isn't going to squat when the government decides to rain down the fury.

Also, your first question is one I don't even want to think about. That's a very, very scary thought. It should keep one up at night.

This is were we disagree. Depends on your resolve those massive armies you speak have been pounding Syria and Afghanistan for years.
Don't think for a minute if we get to shooting at each other foreign governments wont be supplying arms to the rebels, just as the good ole USA has done.

 

[hurleyjd]

Gov. Abbott prevented Obama from taking over Texas with army with the Jade Helm operation. So we as Texans need not worry as long as he is the governor.

 

[M-5]

How many people in the military today would be willing to kill there own people?
That's the thing, it's not about how many, but the idea of the unknown that keeps everyone at bay. Be it the government, or the people. Neither one knows what the other is capable of, and that's the way it will stay until there is a great imbalance in favor of either side.
Removing any large number of rifles will create this imbalance.

We all know what the government is capable of. And I'll say it again. 5, 10, even 100 farmers armed with a .30-.06 or even an AR-15, are not match for an armed, outfitted and well trained group of soldiers with the government behind them. They might take the day, but the week, month or the year long struggle will not be theirs. Rifles aren't even in the same class as what the government has available. Again, I'm not advocating for throwing down our arms and succumbing to the will of the government. I'm arguing that the stockpile of arms in your corner isn't going to squat when the government decides to rain down the fury.

Also, your first question is one I don't even want to think about. That's a very, very scary thought. It should keep one up at night.

This is were we disagree. Depends on your resolve those massive armies you speak have been pounding Syria and Afghanistan for years.
Don't think for a minute if we get to shooting at each other foreign governments wont be supplying arms to the rebels, just as the good ole USA has done.

There are a lot of them in the Military that will Vanish in that situation. Just the sportsman in this country is an astronomical number .

 

[sim.-ang.king]

How many people in the military today would be willing to kill there own people?
That's the thing, it's not about how many, but the idea of the unknown that keeps everyone at bay. Be it the government, or the people. Neither one knows what the other is capable of, and that's the way it will stay until there is a great imbalance in favor of either side.
Removing any large number of rifles will create this imbalance.

We all know what the government is capable of. And I'll say it again. 5, 10, even 100 farmers armed with a .30-.06 or even an AR-15, are not match for an armed, outfitted and well trained group of soldiers with the government behind them. They might take the day, but the week, month or the year long struggle will not be theirs. Rifles aren't even in the same class as what the government has available. Again, I'm not advocating for throwing down our arms and succumbing to the will of the government. I'm arguing that the stockpile of arms in your corner isn't going to squat when the government decides to rain down the fury.

Also, your first question is one I don't even want to think about. That's a very, very scary thought. It should keep one up at night.

But that will be the biggest factor when everything does go south. That man flying an a10, or driving that Abrams tank may just decide that killing their own people is not the right thing to do and turn their guns against the government. Have you ever thought about how many Union troops joined the south at the start of the civil war, and took their arms, and weaponry with them?
The Federal gov. wouldn't be able to keep everyone under their thumb, and there would be a lot of military base that could change hands.

This is the unknown that keeps both sides at bay.

 

[Bestoutwest]

This is were we disagree. Depends on your resolve those massive armies you speak have been pounding Syria and Afghanistan for years.
Don't think for a minute if we get to shooting at each other foreign governments wont be supplying arms to the rebels, just as the good ole USA has done.

This is true. It's always interesting to throw the chips, so to speak, and see where they lie. I would imagine that Russia would support any sort of anti-America coalition, but I can't see the NATO super-powers getting behind what would be perceived as rebels. Therefore, I think it would be accepting help from traditional foes of America, and who knows if those in power of the "opposition" would crawl in bed with them.


That last line is why I don't get too up in arms about the "Russia election scandal." We've been doing it for years, and I'm sure other countries have been doing it to us for years. It's been going on since July 4, 1776.

 

[pdfangus]

for the election tampering to end all they have to do is go back ten years or so and quit using computers to tabulate the elections.

 

[JSCATTLE]

How many people in the military today would be willing to kill there own people?
That's the thing, it's not about how many, but the idea of the unknown that keeps everyone at bay. Be it the government, or the people. Neither one knows what the other is capable of, and that's the way it will stay until there is a great imbalance in favor of either side.
Removing any large number of rifles will create this imbalance.

We all know what the government is capable of. And I'll say it again. 5, 10, even 100 farmers armed with a .30-.06 or even an AR-15, are not match for an armed, outfitted and well trained group of soldiers with the government behind them. They might take the day, but the week, month or the year long struggle will not be theirs. Rifles aren't even in the same class as what the government has available. Again, I'm not advocating for throwing down our arms and succumbing to the will of the government. I'm arguing that the stockpile of arms in your corner isn't going to squat when the government decides to rain down the fury.

Also, your first question is one I don't even want to think about. That's a very, very scary thought. It should keep one up at night.

I guess this is what separates us. If I can kill just 1 I've done my part. I'm sure there would be massive casualties but id be willing to bet I could do some damage before the a 10 got to me. The only thing a marine sniper has I don't would be a 50 cal. I have infrared and night vision . I have an ar as well as a tricked out Remington 700 that I've killed mule deer at 400 yards with on several occasions. I'm not saying we would even come close to winning but starting with a defeatist aditude is what's wrong with this country.

 

[TexasBred]

What do you do with that tank or A-10 once you run out of bullets?? Park it?? Finding ammo for your AR-15 might be a bit easier but no way in he// you would win the war. A well trained, well organized military is a force to behold and you don't want to ever have to confront it.

 

[JSCATTLE]

What do you do with that tank or A-10 once you run out of bullets?? Park it?? Finding ammo for your AR-15 might be a bit easier but no way in he// you would win the war. A well trained, well organized military is a force to behold and you don't want to ever have to confront it.

So we should just give up before we start ? Or die fighting for what we believe in ? History seems to repeat it's self. We don't know who the next Hitler is gonna be. But I know I'd rather die by a bullet then being tortured to death.

 

[Clod Hopper]

I seem to remember a story about a group of rebel farmers and businessmen that defeated a very powerful and well trained army. I am sure it would be messy and costly but I believe there would be enough support from our military through desertion and sabotage to make the price for the government pretty high. I don't think the deterent of citizens being armed is that they would be able to capture the capital but that they would cause such chaos that the government has to play along.

 

[Nesikep]

Anyone who thinks gun control laws work should take a look at Washington DC, NY, Chicago, and LA. Some of the strictest gun laws in the nation but they are probably the most violent places in the nation.

Might also want to review "Causation vs Correlation"

How many people in the military today would be willing to kill there own people?
That's the thing, it's not about how many, but the idea of the unknown that keeps everyone at bay. Be it the government, or the people. Neither one knows what the other is capable of, and that's the way it will stay until there is a great imbalance in favor of either side.
Removing any large number of rifles will create this imbalance.

We all know what the government is capable of. And I'll say it again. 5, 10, even 100 farmers armed with a .30-.06 or even an AR-15, are not match for an armed, outfitted and well trained group of soldiers with the government behind them. They might take the day, but the week, month or the year long struggle will not be theirs. Rifles aren't even in the same class as what the government has available. Again, I'm not advocating for throwing down our arms and succumbing to the will of the government. I'm arguing that the stockpile of arms in your corner isn't going to squat when the government decides to rain down the fury.

Also, your first question is one I don't even want to think about. That's a very, very scary thought. It should keep one up at night.

But that will be the biggest factor when everything does go south. That man flying an a10, or driving that Abrams tank may just decide that killing their own people is not the right thing to do and turn their guns against the government. Have you ever thought about how many Union troops joined the south at the start of the civil war, and took their arms, and weaponry with them?
The Federal gov. wouldn't be able to keep everyone under their thumb, and there would be a lot of military base that could change hands.

This is the unknown that keeps both sides at bay.

You're missing a major point here.. When the army is turned against their own people, the people in the army are going to be fed bull*(&* to make them look like REALLY BAD PEOPLE, so it's OK to open fire on them... and judging by the way people fall for media bull#$%# it's not much of a stretch to think that it's doable.

 

[Lucky]

Are you guys saying if the AR 15 is banned the US as we know it will fall? Holy smokes maybe I should go find mine and oil it up!! Pretty much the most useless rifle I own but that's just my opinion.

 

[HDRider]

How many people in the military today would be willing to kill there own people?
That's the thing, it's not about how many, but the idea of the unknown that keeps everyone at bay. Be it the government, or the people. Neither one knows what the other is capable of, and that's the way it will stay until there is a great imbalance in favor of either side.
Removing any large number of rifles will create this imbalance.

We all know what the government is capable of. And I'll say it again. 5, 10, even 100 farmers armed with a .30-.06 or even an AR-15, are not match for an armed, outfitted and well trained group of soldiers with the government behind them. They might take the day, but the week, month or the year long struggle will not be theirs. Rifles aren't even in the same class as what the government has available. Again, I'm not advocating for throwing down our arms and succumbing to the will of the government. I'm arguing that the stockpile of arms in your corner isn't going to squat when the government decides to rain down the fury.

Also, your first question is one I don't even want to think about. That's a very, very scary thought. It should keep one up at night.

Some give up too easy. Some don't ever give up.

 

[JSCATTLE]

Are you guys saying if the AR 15 is banned the US as we know it will fall? Holy smokes maybe I should go find mine and oil it up!! Pretty much the most useless rifle I own but that's just my opinion.

Not just the ar. That's where they will start and with any law they keep pushing to take more freedom from us. Eventually we have to fight back.
Once they actually take the guns what's stopping them from going door to door and raping or killing people. What's to stop a genocide type situation .