The Left is Correct about 'Assault Rifles'

[The Duke]

How about Rocket Launchers and missiles in private hands?
Attack Helicopter?

That is what is needed if you actually took on a tyrannical Government

Tell that to The Taliban and Viet Cong.

 

[johnwk]

Tell that to The Taliban and Viet Cong.

Exactly! And our military is made up of American citizens who would have to turn on their own sons, daughters, fathers and mothers.

But let us not forget the Tiananmen Square Massacre.

I imagine many here do not recall the Tiananmen Square Massacre of 1989 in which the Communist Chinese Party decided to end a student led demonstration for democracy.

The CCP brought in a couple of divisions of the People’s Liberation Army from remote provinces to end the demonstrations for democracy, and they did so because the CCP anticipated local divisions of the army would not fire upon the protestors and could actually be supporters of the uprising.

Our current problem is, our tyrannical Democrat Party Leadership has imported millions upon millions of foreign nationals from around the world, many of whom I imagine could be bought to use deadly force against American citizens.

Trump warned us that existing unregulated immigration was a Trojan horse.

JWK


“We often give enemies the means of our own destruction.” -- Aesop. Witness the dangerous

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

The basic argument of the Left, that 'assault rifles' are not necessary for personal defense, is correct. (Let's define 'assault rifle' as a semi-automatic rifle which can take magazines of 20 rounds or more, and whose rounds carry more than XXX foot-pounds of kinetic energy. [A gun enthusiast can fill in 'XXX' -- in otherwords, excluding a .22].)

I've seen posts positing a woman using one to fend off a rapist in a park, but, come one, no one is going to carry their AR15 in public on a routine basis, not even Kyle Rittenhouse. If you're going out in public, you need a concealed-carry permit and good-calibre handgun. (Yes, I know liberals want to ban those too, but, it's like their child-grooming efforts: a step at a time. They're not stupid.)

For home defense, a handgun or shotgun -- depending on your ease of using them -- is better than an AR15, in my personal opinion -- you don't want a .556 round travelling three hundred yards into the bedroom of your neighbor's children. Biden is right about that, in my opinion. But you can look at a dozen videos arguing both sides if you go to YouTube and put in 'AR15 vs Shotgun'.

So ... what's the point of an AR15 (or AK or any other 'assault rifle')? It's to partially fulfill the intent of the men who wrote the Second Amendment: that the people should be as well-armed as the government.

Of course, the advance of military technology over the last 250 years has made that impossible. You and a few neighbors with AR15s will not be a match for an A10, or even a Marine rifle company. Any conflict between civilian patriots and the government will be over in three days, and the last two of them will be spent putting the patriots in body bags.

However, unless the patriots are very very stupid -- 6 January level stupid, which is not ruled out, as 6 January itself showed -- there isn't going to be any conflict between the united, cohesive forces of the government, and the patriot movement. So long as the US is a law-governed democratic republic, or is believed to be that by a majority of its citizens, there must not be any armed conflict between patriots and the government.

What there could be is the disintegration of a cohesive government, and general chaos. We can think of a hundred different scenarios leading to this. In which case, patriots should be as well-armed as possible.

And of course every patriot who has not done his military service yet, and is under the age of 36, should enlist in the National Guard. (Army National Guard)

The left isn't right about anything .....they listen to ,"the experts "

 

[Doug1943]

The very weapon our Founders intended ordinary citizens to keep and bear [a contemporary fire arm used by foot soldiers] so they would be ready and able to defend themselves against a despotic government if necessary. The AR-15-semi is a civilian version of the United States military’s M16 and ought to be kept by ordinary citizens to defend against a tyrannical government.

This is exactly right. However, when the 2A was written, muskets plus cannons were the only arms around. And the other things needed for an army -- cavalry for 'intelligence' (scouting) -- were also available to a village militia. But nowadays, a modern military has a lot of things -- not just armaments, but those too -- which a hastily-assembled group of individuals with ARs does not have, or does not have very effectively.

Therefore, two things follow from this disparity of forces.

(1) Patriots must organize. We need to form 'Neighborhood Defense Teams' (call them what you will, except for 'militia'.). When these are established, higher-level co-ordination can happen. But we must mainly build bottom-up to start with.

Once you get a few dozen 'ordinary' Americans together, you can get the advantage of the division of labor and specialization. You'll have some vets, an electrician or two, a nurse (any group of patriots which doesn't make sure to include women, are idiots), builders... and in warfare, these 'support groups' are critical.

Hollywood has conditioned us into thinking war is just men firing rifles, because who wants to see guys driving trucks with ammunition and food, or repairing those trucks? But 80-90% of military personnel are in support roles [ What Percentage of The Military Sees Combat? - Thesoldiersproject ].

Of course, in an active resistance-to-tyranny situation, the patriot side is not going to have a ratio like that. There won't be anyone working out retirement benefits or negotiating the purchase of underwear.

Nonetheless, we would need specialists (and appropriate gear) for comms, medical, intel, perhaps logistics. If this has not been organized, at least at the local level, beforehand ... we'll be at a disadvantage. (Example: a Baofeng or equivalent for each person; for the group, a rudimentary first aid kit, night-vision apparatus, chainsaws, etc are almost as important as the ARs. )

And long before a 'real' situation, your group needs to have practiced, to have worked together, to have attempted various tactical maneuvers, to have given your gear a real workout. Nothing in these situations is as easy as it looks, or as Hollywood makes it look, but it is far more difficult if this is the first time you've worked together.

We're probably going to have more "mini-crises" before the Big One -- mainly natural disasters. Your group can get invaluable experience by responding, as a group, in these situations.

(2) We must, now, reach out and have as close relations as possible with the ranks of the existing military (and police). An ideal situation for a tyrannical government is a military that is completely isolated from the people -- foreign mercenaries, like the Wagner Group in Ukraine, are ideal, (as are the Chechens fighting for Putin).

So: patriots should volunteer for the USO, should enlist in the National Guard, should be in ROTC. If eligible, they should be in their local veterans' organization (VVAW, VFW, American Legion), where the majority will be patriots as well and where they ought to find recruits for their Neighborhood Defense Group.

Hopefully, none of this will be necessary, any more than your AR15 will be necessary to deal with home invaders. It's just-in-case. The US has only experienced one serious civil conflict in its history -- where more Americans were killed than in all our wars before or since added together.

But no one knows the future, and things are getting crazy. (Literally crazy: see [Destroying the American Military --II ])

So ... organize at the local level, and be as close to the official military as possible.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Only certain weapons

Semi-autos?

 

[rightwinger]

Semi-autos?

Some, also make handguns harder to purchase

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Some, also make handguns harder to purchase

And what would that solve? The majority of guns in the hands of criminals now are stolen.

 

[80zephyr]

You still believe that nonsense that Minute Men won the Revolution?

Why is it nonsense? The "minute men" in Vietnam and Afghanistan won, didn't they?

 

[rightwinger]

And what would that solve? The majority of guns in the hands of criminals now are stolen.

Is that why you want to put up a sign in front of your house bragging that you have guns?

 

[Doug1943]

How about Rocket Launchers and missiles in private hands?
Attack Helicopter?

That is what is needed if you actually took on a tyrannical Government

Yes. If we posit a cohesive, disciplined military, obedient to a tyranical government, versus that part of a resistant civilian population willing and able to take up arms ... the latter would be defeated.

However, huge social ruptures such as would precipitate an American civil war don't usually end up with a united, cohesive government vs an angry population.

Usually, the population is divided, and government structures are divided. That is, the 'tyrannical government' has a large part of the population on its side (not necessarily a majority), but itself is not able to mobilize all of the armed men (police and military). The military is a reflection of society and will reproduce within itself the conflicts of society.

In a hypothetical American case, the political skill of the leadership of the patriots will be key. If we look like the aggressors, if we look like people wanting to impose a horrible white rightwing Christian Nationalist dictatorship on the rest of America, then we will have less chance of persuading the military to disobey the tyranical government. It will be January 6 all over again.

Of course, the Left will then have the excuse it's been looking for to impose its own dictatorship on society.

What is likely? At the moment, the Right has about the worst possible leadership. Not just the egregious Trump, but the rank and file, represent a very low level of understanding. The popularity of the QAnon craziness alone is proof of that.

For example, the Mainstream Media are bad on issues of race and sexuality. But the conservative media are atrocious on almost everything. So in any crisis, our side will probably do everything wrong -- 6 January all over again, but this time playing for keeps.

But perhaps things will change.

 

[rightwinger]

Why is it nonsense? The "minute men" in Vietnam and Afghanistan won, didn't they?

The Viet Cong and Taliban were supplied with weapons from foreign powers. They were not bought at the corner gun shop

 

[Ralph Norton]

You put up a sign indicating your home has guns and you are more likely to be robbed.

Source?

 

[rightwinger]

Yes. If we posit a cohesive, disciplined military, obedient to a tyranical government, versus that part of a resistant civilian population willing and able to take up arms ... the latter would be defeated.

However, huge social ruptures such as would precipitate an American civil war don't usually end up with a united, cohesive government vs an angry population.

Usually, the population is divided, and government structures are divided. That is, the 'tyrannical government' has a large part of the population on its side (not necessarily a majority), but itself is not able to mobilize all of the armed men (police and military). The military is a reflection of society and will reproduce within itself the conflicts of society.

In a hypothetical American case, the political skill of the leadership of the patriots will be key. If we look like the aggressors, if we look like people wanting to impose a horrible white rightwing Christian Nationalist dictatorship on the rest of America, then we will have less chance of persuading the military to disobey the tyranical government. It will be January 6 all over again.

Of course, the Left will then have the excuse it's been looking for to impose its own dictatorship on society.

What is likely? At the moment, the Right has about the worst possible leadership. Not just the egregious Trump, but the rank and file, represent a very low level of understanding. The popularity of the QAnon craziness alone is proof of that.

For example, the Mainstream Media are bad on issues of race and sexuality. But the conservative media are atrocious on almost everything. So in any crisis, our side will probably do everything wrong -- 6 January all over again, but this time playing for keeps.

But perhaps things will change.

You keep assuming that those on your side of the Revolution will be right versus the batshit crazy zealots who believe the conspiracies they read on the internet.

 

[80zephyr]

Not at all true

They created a Constitution with freedom of speech, a free press and the vote to keep Govt honest

Our framers wanted an armed populace as part of a well regulated militia that is necessary for a free state.

They never called for a bunch of armed crazies acting on their own

If you were correct, all arms would have been stored in armories. They weren't.

 

[80zephyr]

You Goofy

Why do you say that? Do you think the government has more, or less, control over our lives than they did 50 years ago?

 

[rightwinger]

If you were correct, all arms would have been stored in armories. They weren't.

No, they were distributed to the general population.

They never protected our country, never were needed to overthrow the government.

But they do cause 45,000 gun deaths a year

 

[Doug1943]

Why is it nonsense? The "minute men" in Vietnam and Afghanistan won, didn't they?

In both the American Revolution, and in Vietnam and Afghanistan, the support of professional militaries from other countries, or their equipment and other kinds of support, played a decisive role. [5 Ways the French Helped Win the American Revolution].

The Soviets and Chinese helped North Vietnam, whose armies defeated us in South Vietnam. The Pashtun tribesmen of Afghanistan were closest to being 'Minutemen', but they had plenty of help from their fellow tribesmen in Pakistan, and probably help from elements in the Pakistani Army as well.

There are examples of 'minutemen' defeating a professional army. They did in Cuba, when that army, under an unpopular dictator, fell apart. But when young radicals in the rest of Latin America tried to repeat the Cuban example, they were all slaughtered.

Of course American patriots should exercise their 2A rights. And they should organize at the local level. But if their leaders stumble into a situation in which it's patriots vs a united, disciplined American military, they'll lose.

And if that happens, we won't be able to pretend that we really won, like in the 2020 election.

 

[80zephyr]

The Viet Cong and Taliban were supplied with weapons from foreign powers. They were not bought at the corner gun shop

Does not matter. The US government had planes, tanks, etc at their disposal, and still lost. It was the man with a rifle that defeated the US

 

[80zephyr]

No, they were distributed to the general population.

They never protected our country, never were needed to overthrow the government.

But they do cause 35,000 gun deaths a year

You can't have it both ways. If they were distributed to the general population, they were not meant only for a militia.

 

[80zephyr]

In both the American Revolution, and in Vietnam and Afghanistan, the support of professional militaries from other countries, or their equipment and other kinds of support, played a decisive role. [5 Ways the French Helped Win the American Revolution].

The Soviets and Chinese helped North Vietnam, whose armies defeated us in South Vietnam. The Pashtun tribesmen of Afghanistan were closest to being 'Minutemen', but they had plenty of help from their fellow tribesmen in Pakistan, and probably help from elements in the Pakistani Army as well.

There are examples of 'minutemen' defeating a professional army. They did in Cuba, when that army, under an unpopular dictator, fell apart. But when young radicals in the rest of Latin America tried to repeat the Cuban example, they were all slaughtered.

Of course American patriots should exercise their 2A rights. And they should organize at the local level. But if their leaders stumble into a situation in which it's patriots vs a united, disciplined American military, they'll lose.

And if that happens, we won't be able to pretend that we really won, like in the 2020 election.

Who will lose?