Just got a new perspective on gunz

[Poniiboi]

I have nothing in common with the trailer trash that usually upholds the viewpoint of the NRA. However, I can agree with their paranoia about the government. Though I don't believe that there is a coordinated effort to destroy the masses for the benefit of the few, I do believe that this behavior is ingrained into the human psyche at a core level, so the effect is the same.

If we allow the government to take away rights to assault weapons, yes, assault weapons, they have effectively enslaved us. Cuz cops and soldiers will still have them, leaving citizens with no way to defend themselves against martial law, which in theory, because of fucking W. Bush (and upheld by Obama) can be imposed at any time.

Armaggeddon theory, maybe. But probable. Just not in the IMMEDIATE future. We're gonna wipe ourselves out. I wonder what the rich will do when they don't have anyone to lord their possessions over?

[LemonCrush]

At 1/8/13 06:56 PM, SenatorJohnDean wrote: I have nothing in common with the trailer trash that usually upholds the viewpoint of the NRA....

I stopped here because you're an ignorant, discriminatory ass.

FWIW, contrary to your misinformed and stupid stereotyping, most of the NRA members I've met (all my friends work at a gun store), are doctors, lawyers and cops.

[Iron-Hampster]

of course this thread also highlights a good reason not to let military spending get out of hand either. If it gets too high, all the freedom the constitution grants wouldn't be enough because people would be up against state of the art weaponry and overwhelming numbers. Do both and people will be much more safe from tyranny.

[LemonCrush]

At 1/8/13 09:44 PM, Iron-Hampster wrote: of course this thread also highlights a good reason not to let military spending get out of hand either. If it gets too high, all the freedom the constitution grants wouldn't be enough because people would be up against state of the art weaponry and overwhelming numbers. Do both and people will be much more safe from tyranny.

This is already the case.

Various sources predict that 2015/16 will be the year it hits the fan. The dollar will collapse and/or the US will be part of another oil embargo, causing rationing of fuel...which will cause major issues in urban areas...

This is the reason why DoHS and the TSA bought all that ammo a while back. To combat when shit gets crazy in major urban areas. They're also buying out rental units and storage spaces...

I for one, hope they're wrong..

[Saen]

Sounds like typical redneck paranoia bullshit I've been hearing for years now, always something to be afraid of. Just can't wait for your end of days wet dream.

[TNT]

At 1/8/13 09:48 PM, LemonCrush wrote:

Various sources predict that 2015/16 will be the year it hits the fan. The dollar will collapse and/or the US will be part of another oil embargo, causing rationing of fuel...which will cause major issues in urban areas...

Can you share these various sources?

[LemonCrush]

At 1/8/13 09:50 PM, Saen wrote: Sounds like typical redneck paranoia bullshit I've been hearing for years now, always something to be afraid of. Just can't wait for your end of days wet dream.

I actually specifically said I DIDN'T want it to happen. Can you read?

FYI, this "paranoid redneck" worked for the Pentagon...and to my knowledge, they are not really "Rednecks" but rather highly educated individuals

[Saen]

At 1/8/13 09:54 PM, LemonCrush wrote:
I actually specifically said I DIDN'T want it to happen. Can you read?

Bullshit, the collapse of the global market is all you rant about every day. You and millions of other white trash are afflicted with this obsession for "the end of the world". You're nothing special, get over the idea and actually contribute something worth our time.

[LemonCrush]

At 1/8/13 09:50 PM, TNT wrote: Can you share these various sources?

I've heard it from 3 different unrelated sources

Someone I know in the Secret Service
Retired Lt. Gen. who also worked in the Pentagon
And of course a Youtube video from a person who did not give their name, but claimed to be [formerly] a high up in the DHS.

The 3rd source may not be too reliable...though they knew things that weren't very common knowledge regarding the founding of the DHS and the like.

[LemonCrush]

At 1/8/13 09:59 PM, Saen wrote: Bullshit, the collapse of the global market is all you rant about every day. You and millions of other white trash are afflicted with this obsession for "the end of the world"

The fuck are you even talking about? When do I ever post about "the end of the world"

Also, stop saying "white trash". I don't think you know what it means.

[TNT]

At 1/8/13 09:59 PM, LemonCrush wrote:

At 1/8/13 09:50 PM, TNT wrote: Can you share these various sources?

I've heard it from 3 different unrelated sources

Someone I know in the Secret Service
Retired Lt. Gen. who also worked in the Pentagon
And of course a Youtube video from a person who did not give their name, but claimed to be [formerly] a high up in the DHS.

The 3rd source may not be too reliable...though they knew things that weren't very common knowledge regarding the founding of the DHS and the like.

No offense to your buddy in the secret service or to the retired Lt. General, but I can't take that to heart. Just hearing something doesn't sell me, and I was hoping you had some sort of journal publication, article, or something similar to show what you are talking about.

Not calling you a liar, but hearing something just sounds vague to me.

[Saen]

At 1/8/13 10:00 PM, LemonCrush wrote:
The fuck are you even talking about? When do I ever post about "the end of the world"

Wow I really hope you continue to commit to this statement. Try and go one day without asserting the the president is a fascist and wants to convert our dollars into predator drones, ultimately resulting in hyper inflation and a global economic collapse.

Also, stop saying "white trash". I don't think you know what it means.

I don't think you know that your ideas actually place yourself into this categorization.

[LemonCrush]

At 1/8/13 10:11 PM, TNT wrote: No offense to your buddy in the secret service or to the retired Lt. General, but I can't take that to heart. Just hearing something doesn't sell me, and I was hoping you had some sort of journal publication, article, or something similar to show what you are talking about.

Not calling you a liar, but hearing something just sounds vague to me.

No offense taken.

Like I said, this is just what they told me. And people in those position don't just make shit up, you know? If anyone would know something like that, these people would be in a position to know it...

[science-is-fun]

lots of countries have banned assault weapons with little trouble

the real troubles will begin when we are not as wealthy

[Ravariel]

At 1/8/13 06:56 PM, SenatorJohnDean wrote: If we allow the government to take away rights to assault weapons, yes, assault weapons, they have effectively enslaved us. Cuz cops and soldiers will still have them, leaving citizens with no way to defend themselves against martial law

If you think that any armed populace has the wherewithal to stand up to the might of the US military, you need to stop watching 80's action movies. One guy with an AK is not going to stop the US government from doing whatever they want to/with him if they suddenly decide they want to go full retard.

The whole "protection against the government" line is fantasy in this day and age.

[LemonCrush]

At 1/8/13 06:56 PM, SenatorJohnDean wrote:

If we allow the government to take away rights to assault weapons, yes, assault weapons, they have effectively enslaved us.

To my knowledge, assault weapons have never been legal to own, and the ones that are are barely obtainable. Literally almost impossible..

[Tony-DarkGrave]

At 1/8/13 11:17 PM, Ravariel wrote: The whole "protection against the government" line is fantasy in this day and age.

hardly just ask a police officer or servicemen "if the government turned tyranical would you comply?" they would say no and the fact there is 400+ Million civilian firearms says something. there are 1.5 Service members in the armed forces for the government and there is 312 Million.

doesn't look like its much of a crap shoot is you ask me guy.

[LemonCrush]

At 1/8/13 11:23 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: hardly just ask a police officer or servicemen "if the government turned tyranical would you comply?" they would say no

The govt is already tyrannical, and no one cares.

[Silverdust]

You know, I have had this buggy question in the back of my head for a few weeks regarding gun control. For those of you who cling to firearms for safety from the government, how exactly would you defend your home from the advanced technology of the United States armed forces?

Think about it. Sure, you may have weapons capable of fending off small groups of soldiers every once in a while; but, how would you fare against the Air Force? Honestly, if the country falls into civil unrest of some sort, and you become an armed threat, how would these weapons which are being debated over protect you from attack chopper AGMs, air strikes, and A-10 strafing runs?

Moreover, how would you defend yourselves from Infantry Fighting Vehicles and other armored carriers on the ground - let alone armored jeeps and humvees?

The only practical reason for an individual to own a firearm is to protect his property and family from criminals. An adequately armed militia is the only entity that should be equipped with arms capable of fending off a hypothetical civil war. So, what really is needed to discourage criminals? A handgun should be enough.

[RacistBassist]

At 1/9/13 12:12 AM, Silverdust wrote: Stuff about military tech

1. Not all soldiers would comply with orders to stand vs the US populace, and many would defect.
2. There simply aren't enough soldiers to occupy the US effectively, let alone the big gun states
3. US soldiers against any large number of US citizens would almost immediately have the US government lose public support.
4. Guerilla tactics are lol. We can't even deal with some terrorists in the third world, what the hell would happen with several million gun owners, even if there is not a huge split in the military and law enforcement.

The only practical reason for an individual to own a firearm is to protect his property and family from criminals. An adequately armed militia is the only entity that should be equipped with arms capable of fending off a hypothetical civil war. So, what really is needed to discourage criminals? A handgun should be enough.

On an individual level yes, but the South sure put up one bloody of a fight, imagine what would happen with the military (Which is largely pro-gun rights) and law enforcement. It'd basically be the whole North vs South bullshit going on again, with sporadic states being on the geographically opposite side, and that'd be assuming a unified front and not insurrections cropping up, any government looking anything getting shot the moment they go to someones door, and things like that. It will never come down to bloody violence on a mass scale. It would come down to the gun grabbers telling the gun clingers to toss them over with the gun clingers replying "Molon Labe." I dare you to find any person who would be ok with being the one to participate in mass scale door to door policies to try to revoke firearms.

[Camarohusky]

At 1/8/13 11:23 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: hardly just ask a police officer or servicemen "if the government turned tyranical would you comply?" they would say no

Governments rarely become tyrannical overtly. It's usually a slow enough process that the populace tends not to notice the shift. Heck, there are many who claim the government is already tyrannical, and yet those police officers and servicement would still do what the government told them over those objections.

and the fact there is 400+ Million civilian firearms says something. there are 1.5 Service members in the armed forces for the government and there is 312 Million.

312 million dopes with guns is hardly a match for a well mobilized and well armed military force. Not to say success isn't possible, but if the government was truly willing (I mean truly willing to the extent of using all means) that 1.5 mill could easily overcome the 312 million dopes. This also assumes, quite niavely, that if the government ever became tyrranical, that all but those in the military would oppose it. A HUGE chunk would support the government, out of blind patriotism, fear, comfort, continuity, or whatever reason. I would be surprised if more than 25% rose up in actual arms against a tyrannical US government. 75 million untrained dopes make a very easy objective with the right lack of discretion. If the US went full on tyrannical, you can be damn sure the "high road" military fighting would go right out the door.

[LemonCrush]

At 1/9/13 12:41 AM, Camarohusky wrote: Governments rarely become tyrannical overtly. It's usually a slow enough process that the populace tends not to notice the shift. Heck, there are many who claim the government is already tyrannical, and yet those police officers and servicement would still do what the government told them over those objections.

Agreed. I wanted to say this, but didn't feel like articulating it. Thanks.

[Tony-DarkGrave]

At 1/9/13 12:41 AM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 1/8/13 11:23 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: hardly just ask a police officer or servicemen "if the government turned tyranical would you comply?" they would say no

Governments rarely become tyrannical overtly. It's usually a slow enough process that the populace tends not to notice the shift. Heck, there are many who claim the government is already tyrannical, and yet those police officers and servicement would still do what the government told them over those objections.

and the fact there is 400+ Million civilian firearms says something. there are 1.5 Service members in the armed forces for the government and there is 312 Million.

a large amount would desert

312 million dopes with guns is hardly a match for a well mobilized and well armed military force. Not to say success isn't possible, but if the government was truly willing (I mean truly willing to the extent of using all means) that 1.5 mill could easily overcome the 312 million dopes.

don't think so civilians have the same weapons as Military (not including drones the air force etc) I am talking infantry style small arms.

This also assumes, quite niavely, that if the government ever became tyrranical, that all but those in the military would oppose it. A HUGE chunk would support the government, out of blind patriotism, fear, comfort, continuity, or whatever reason. I would be surprised if more than 25% rose up in actual arms against a tyrannical US government. 75 million untrained dopes make a very easy objective with the right lack of discretion. If the US went full on tyrannical, you can be damn sure the "high road" military fighting would go right out the door.

hmm lets see Iraq we have a whole bunch of batshit insane muslims using IEDs and guerrilla tactics on our armed forces and they were doing such a great job at it even with the trained soldiers assault vehicles and drones and on top of that they are firing on their own citizens because " the government told them to"? right lets see how well that goes.

[aviewaskewed]

At 1/9/13 01:23 AM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: a large amount would desert

What's "a large amount"? What do you base it off of? How many of them will steal artillery from the MASSIVE arsenal the US government has been building for the last 50+ years on their way out?

don't think so civilians have the same weapons as Military (not including drones the air force etc) I am talking infantry style small arms.

"Oh look hon...what are those bloody great planes doing...oh...bombs...well at least giant tanks aren't rolling over the horizon to totally own us right? Ah...ah shit...". The military already can overrun any civilian militia or force. The reason they don't is because they and we and the government still believe in the rules and societal morals that say they can't. That's it. It's not a matter of "can they" it's a matter of "will they ever want to".

hmm lets see Iraq we have a whole bunch of batshit insane muslims using IEDs and guerrilla tactics on our armed forces and they were doing such a great job at it even with the trained soldiers assault vehicles and drones and on top of that they are firing on their own citizens because " the government told them to"? right lets see how well that goes.

False equivalency. Not even close to the same thing. The "batshit insane muslims" using those tactics don't follow rules of engagement, war, any of that crap that the rest of us decided to follow and be bound to. They win because they're a disorganized, disguised, and unruly force that is taking advantage of the moral restraint of the larger force. If the larger force went at them totally and completely without moral or mercy, they could easily leave the entire country a smoking crater with 0 population left because that's the kind of fucking arsenal America has.

You want to argue hypotheticals kiddies? Then let's argue them right and logically, yeesh.

[Poniiboi]

At 1/8/13 07:07 PM, LemonCrush wrote:

At 1/8/13 06:56 PM, SenatorJohnDean wrote: I have nothing in common with the trailer trash that usually upholds the viewpoint of the NRA....

I stopped here because you're an ignorant, discriminatory ass.

FWIW, contrary to your misinformed and stupid stereotyping, most of the NRA members I've met (all my friends work at a gun store), are doctors, lawyers and cops.

You know what? I actually have to apologize for that statement, because I am also of the opinion that people in power want to keep us separated and divided so they can impose martial law over us. I purport to this philosophy, yet I did not follow it in my statement about trailer trash.

So sincere apology. No troll. I hope that the left and right can actually come together on this issue. Hell, I might even get me a semi before they shut the shit down.

[Camarohusky]

At 1/9/13 01:23 AM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: a large amount would desert

That is possible, but then again, it's just as likely that desertions would be very small. If the people in the military, who join the military for various reasons, don't believe what the government is doing is bad, they will be less likely to desert.

don't think so civilians have the same weapons as Military (not including drones the air force etc) I am talking infantry style small arms.

Tanks, Jets, missiles, warships, heavy machine guns? No. It would be small arms (nerfed up small arms at that) against a the most high tech miitary in the world.

hmm lets see Iraq we have a whole bunch of batshit insane muslims using IEDs and guerrilla tactics on our armed forces and they were doing such a great job at it even with the trained soldiers assault vehicles and drones and on top of that they are firing on their own citizens because " the government told them to"? right lets see how well that goes.

You completely missed the point. We are fighting in Iraq and Iran with a huge amount of very restrictive rules. I know a very good method that could have stamped out a big chunk of the insurgency and a back method that would have almost destroyed it, but both of these methods would involve no inhibitions to how evil and dirty the military could get. The first idea involves public torture and purposeful targetting of civilians as retaliation (see Viet Cong tactics). The second is pure anihilation. Indiscriminately killing every living thing in the hostile area (see salting Carthage). Tyrannical governments have done acts like this all throughout history and they're very effective. The US, rightly so, fights with a sense of righteousness and being above these vile tactis. If the US went full on tyrannical and turned against its people I wouldn't be surprised to see the high road style of fighting delve into the dirty, but effective, styles similar to what I just described.

[Tony-DarkGrave]

At 1/9/13 03:49 AM, aviewaskewed wrote:

At 1/9/13 01:23 AM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: a large amount would desert

What's "a large amount"? What do you base it off of? How many of them will steal artillery from the MASSIVE arsenal the US government has been building for the last 50+ years on their way out?

the military may take orders from the government but if it violates the constitution or or some law they can legally disobey it. its in the UCMJ. and the you wouldn't think a large amount of our service members would desert if the government became tyranical?

don't think so civilians have the same weapons as Military (not including drones the air force etc) I am talking infantry style small arms.

The reason they don't is because they and we and the government still believe in the rules and societal morals that say they can't. That's it. It's not a matter of "can they" it's a matter of "will they ever want to".

thats putting alot faith in people when nowadays its all about money.

False equivalency. Not even close to the same thing. The "batshit insane muslims" using those tactics don't follow rules of engagement, war, any of that crap that the rest of us decided to follow and be bound to. They win because they're a disorganized, disguised, and unruly force that is taking advantage of the moral restraint of the larger force. If the larger force went at them totally and completely without moral or mercy, they could easily leave the entire country a smoking crater with 0 population left because that's the kind of fucking arsenal America has.

hardly a false equivalency, and you think american citizens much less the right wing militia groups would? I know I would they would be using guerilla tactics just like what went on in Iraq. because the the UN and some rules say you can't or because its a damn good offensive tactic? and you forget were talking of a military ruled by a tyrannical government so playing fair is off the table.

[LemonCrush]

At 1/9/13 07:08 AM, SenatorJohnDean wrote: So sincere apology. No troll. I hope that the left and right can actually come together on this issue. Hell, I might even get me a semi before they shut the shit down.

Cool..

Good luck finding any guns now...stores literally cannot keep "assault rifles" (at least what the government is calling assualt rifles) on shelves...but if you can get one, get as many as you can, as well as as much ammo and mags you can get...they'll be good as gold once the tards on Capitol Hill get their way..

Obama...guns salesman of the year

[LemonCrush]

At 1/9/13 12:34 PM, Tony-DarkGrave wrote: the military may take orders from the government but if it violates the constitution or or some law they can legally disobey it. its in the UCMJ. and the you wouldn't think a large amount of our service members would desert if the government became tyranical?

Chances are, they wouldn't even notice the tyranny due to the govts clever wording and/or fear mongering..

[Tony-DarkGrave]

if you guys are interested buy firearms here before its to late!