Too close to home

[Uncensored2008]

How are you going to get rid all the guns in the hood?

The peeps in the hood aren't shooting up schools.

I know you're a fucking retard, but did you REALLY just say that?

 

[Wyatt earp]

This latest mass shooting was in my neck of the woods.

What's got to happen before guns for all gets shitcanned?

Research shows that a majority of people will have to be exposed to a mass shooting incident before attitudes change sufficiently. Until then its in the 'hasn't happened in my back yard' category, which is not enough incentive to reduce easy access to handguns and military style semi automatics, (mssa)...

Using data from multiple sources on mass public shootings merged with the 2010 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), we show that increased proximity to a mass shooting is associated with heightened public support for stricter government regulation of firearms. Importantly, we show that this main effect does not vary by partisanship.
https://www.cambridge.org/​

These tragedies are sad but gun violence and gun accidents are the cost of freedom and liberty. We the people are the last line of defense. That's how our Founding Fathers saw it, and that's how the Constitution sees it.

Last line of defense against what? Our own government? Boyo, the government could wipe your entire family off the map in one day and no one would ever know what happened to you. No number of weapons are going to protect you against the government. We don't even know what kinds of weapons they have cooked up in their military R&D. You're going to stop the big bad gov with a little semi-auto? Haha.

We seen different at the Bundy ranch..




.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

This latest mass shooting was in my neck of the woods.

What's got to happen before guns for all gets shitcanned?

Research shows that a majority of people will have to be exposed to a mass shooting incident before attitudes change sufficiently. Until then its in the 'hasn't happened in my back yard' category, which is not enough incentive to reduce easy access to handguns and military style semi automatics, (mssa)...

Using data from multiple sources on mass public shootings merged with the 2010 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), we show that increased proximity to a mass shooting is associated with heightened public support for stricter government regulation of firearms. Importantly, we show that this main effect does not vary by partisanship.
https://www.cambridge.org/​

These tragedies are sad but gun violence and gun accidents are the cost of freedom and liberty. We the people are the last line of defense. That's how our Founding Fathers saw it, and that's how the Constitution sees it.

Last line of defense against what? Our own government? Boyo, the government could wipe your entire family off the map in one day and no one would ever know what happened to you. No number of weapons are going to protect you against the government. We don't even know what kinds of weapons they have cooked up in their military R&D. You're going to stop the big bad gov with a little semi-auto? Haha.

Would that it never happens here, but for the sake or argument, consider that if only 50% of gun owners decided to resist, they would number in excess of 50,000,000. A good percentage have military or police combat training. Many individuals and groups have been collecting weapons for years.

Total active US military personnel numbers under 4,000,000. Reserves equal about 800,000. Do the math.

It's doubtful in such a situation that local police would join them, since they and their families have to live in the same neighborhoods with the resistors.

We have seen in the Middle East in recent years the potential of insurgent armies. Also, it is unlikely the national government would be willing to lay waste large portions of America in order to force an unconstitutional point of law, no matter how corrupt they may be. Money, after all, is money.

Well yeah, no shit. It's all rhetorical. My point is, even if you have a massive fighting force, it's useless if it has no direction and no clear leader. Chaos is going to favor the small, mobile, and precise government/military force.

In the case that Billy Bob is sitting in his house with his shotgun held close, waiting for Big Brother to come for him ... well, if they want to kill Billy, they can do it from a mile away before he even has a chance to blink. That little shotgun isn't going to do him any good. If they want to sneak into his house and bug it, they're just going to wait for him to leave. Meanwhile his gun is sitting there, collecting dust. See what I mean? In no circumstance does Billy's gun actually help protect him from the government.

Who said the resistance to such an attempt would be sitting home waiting?

And you'd be surprised how quickly a sufficiently disciplined group can be put together.

 

[KeiserC]

This latest mass shooting was in my neck of the woods.

What's got to happen before guns for all gets shitcanned? These parents should sue the government for not protecting kids that are required by law to attend school.

I'm going to try to tread lightly here... forgive me in advance for expressing a diametrically opposite view in your 'time of apparent emotion'

- unjustifiable homicides are to be 'exclusively' laid at the feet of the perpetrator... NOT the hardware / tool utilized.

- It is 'unnatural' to to think that data bases and log-rhythmic"sophistication" will ever be a reliable safeguard against 'human nature... at its worst'. Do you realize how rapidly a benign 14 yo boy goes amiss to a 17 yo homicidal hellion without tripping any Federal or State 'trip wires'. The most dangerous thing people can do is complacently entrust their personal safety (entirely) unto an other entity other than themselves... (town, state... police... FBI, ATF)... Sure they will be there to sweep your moist remnants into a pile...

Recognize first that evil exists in the world and all minds are not created equally... Unless you consign all your personal freedoms away to live in a virtual 'prison unto yourself'... You will have to confront head on the scourges that slip through the cracks... Society has not evolved as far as the MSM, Mr. Gates.. & Zimmerman want you to believe.... you may want to reserve for yourself the option of 'defending yourself' if it comes down to your life, your kids life etc...

So your solution is ... what, exactly? Pray, and meanwhile buy more guns? Legit.

Not too far off... your an apt reader and 'quick learner'. Obviously be proficient with any firearm you have... educate those you care about / facilitate their self defense knowledge and equipment & most importantly... network ...

 

[Wyatt earp]

These tragedies are sad but gun violence and gun accidents are the cost of freedom and liberty. We the people are the last line of defense. That's how our Founding Fathers saw it, and that's how the Constitution sees it.

Last line of defense against what? Our own government? Boyo, the government could wipe your entire family off the map in one day and no one would ever know what happened to you. No number of weapons are going to protect you against the government. We don't even know what kinds of weapons they have cooked up in their military R&D. You're going to stop the big bad gov with a little semi-auto? Haha.

It's doubtful. But the beauty is we'll never find out because there are 300 million guns in the hands of it's citizens.

And of course none of that matters because the bottom line is that's how the Founding Fathers saw it, and that's how the Constitution sees it.

To actually harness that power, you'd have to organize it. Think you're gonna organize 100 million people? 10 million? 1 million? Probably not, huh? How about 100,000? Very unlikely in the heat of the inevitable mass panic and confusion that would surely ensue were the government to take military action against the American people. Okay, so maybe 10,000? Okay, maybe you could actually get 10,000 people to form a coherent fighting force.

Oh yeah, right; 10,000 people ain't jack shit. And chances are you couldn't even manage that. It's hard enough trying to get a few hundred organized over something stupid and (relatively) risk free like a company party. Meanwhile, the military is already highly organized, well-trained, and armed with the best weapons and technology. They would win before the American people even knew what the hell was happening. The best you could hope for is some kind of war of attrition, and then it would be less about guns and more about the spirit, the soul, and the will to win at any cost.

The 2nd amendment is not going to help you "fight the government". Please get that through your thick heads.

Dude, you are wasting your time. I know the history. I know the intent. That's all that matters.

Okay. Keep telling yourself that, lol. Meanwhile, people with brains will remain fully aware that having a gun won't do shit for you should the government come calling. Maybe you'll be able to stop a burglar or scare off a bear, though.

So remind us how long has the US military been fighting against sheep herders in Afghanistan?

 

[Lakhota]

So it's the gun's fault.

Nope, it's the fucktard that has the gun.

And the fucktards that allowed the fucktard access to a gun.

The Congress Members Receiving the Most N.R.A. Funding

 

[John Shaw]

Research shows that a majority of people will have to be exposed to a mass shooting incident before attitudes change sufficiently. Until then its in the 'hasn't happened in my back yard' category, which is not enough incentive to reduce easy access to handguns and military style semi automatics, (mssa)...

Using data from multiple sources on mass public shootings merged with the 2010 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), we show that increased proximity to a mass shooting is associated with heightened public support for stricter government regulation of firearms. Importantly, we show that this main effect does not vary by partisanship.
https://www.cambridge.org/​

These tragedies are sad but gun violence and gun accidents are the cost of freedom and liberty. We the people are the last line of defense. That's how our Founding Fathers saw it, and that's how the Constitution sees it.

Last line of defense against what? Our own government? Boyo, the government could wipe your entire family off the map in one day and no one would ever know what happened to you. No number of weapons are going to protect you against the government. We don't even know what kinds of weapons they have cooked up in their military R&D. You're going to stop the big bad gov with a little semi-auto? Haha.

Would that it never happens here, but for the sake or argument, consider that if only 50% of gun owners decided to resist, they would number in excess of 50,000,000. A good percentage have military or police combat training. Many individuals and groups have been collecting weapons for years.

Total active US military personnel numbers under 4,000,000. Reserves equal about 800,000. Do the math.

It's doubtful in such a situation that local police would join them, since they and their families have to live in the same neighborhoods with the resistors.

We have seen in the Middle East in recent years the potential of insurgent armies. Also, it is unlikely the national government would be willing to lay waste large portions of America in order to force an unconstitutional point of law, no matter how corrupt they may be. Money, after all, is money.

Well yeah, no shit. It's all rhetorical. My point is, even if you have a massive fighting force, it's useless if it has no direction and no clear leader. Chaos is going to favor the small, mobile, and precise government/military force.

In the case that Billy Bob is sitting in his house with his shotgun held close, waiting for Big Brother to come for him ... well, if they want to kill Billy, they can do it from a mile away before he even has a chance to blink. That little shotgun isn't going to do him any good. If they want to sneak into his house and bug it, they're just going to wait for him to leave. Meanwhile his gun is sitting there, collecting dust. See what I mean? In no circumstance does Billy's gun actually help protect him from the government.

Who said the resistance to such an attempt would be sitting home waiting?

And you'd be surprised how quickly a sufficiently disciplined group can be put together.

Well if the gov is coming after you, they probably aren't going to let you know they're coming, or when. Billy Bob in my scenario is hugging his shotty because that's what he does every day, wearing his trusty tinfoil hat and hoarding 3 years of rations in an underground bunker.

 

[ding]

Who doesn't love their shotties?

 

[KeiserC]

Research shows that a majority of people will have to be exposed to a mass shooting incident before attitudes change sufficiently. Until then its in the 'hasn't happened in my back yard' category, which is not enough incentive to reduce easy access to handguns and military style semi automatics, (mssa)...

Using data from multiple sources on mass public shootings merged with the 2010 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), we show that increased proximity to a mass shooting is associated with heightened public support for stricter government regulation of firearms. Importantly, we show that this main effect does not vary by partisanship.
https://www.cambridge.org/​

These tragedies are sad but gun violence and gun accidents are the cost of freedom and liberty. We the people are the last line of defense. That's how our Founding Fathers saw it, and that's how the Constitution sees it.

Last line of defense against what? Our own government? Boyo, the government could wipe your entire family off the map in one day and no one would ever know what happened to you. No number of weapons are going to protect you against the government. We don't even know what kinds of weapons they have cooked up in their military R&D. You're going to stop the big bad gov with a little semi-auto? Haha.

Would that it never happens here, but for the sake or argument, consider that if only 50% of gun owners decided to resist, they would number in excess of 50,000,000. A good percentage have military or police combat training. Many individuals and groups have been collecting weapons for years.

Total active US military personnel numbers under 4,000,000. Reserves equal about 800,000. Do the math.

It's doubtful in such a situation that local police would join them, since they and their families have to live in the same neighborhoods with the resistors.

We have seen in the Middle East in recent years the potential of insurgent armies. Also, it is unlikely the national government would be willing to lay waste large portions of America in order to force an unconstitutional point of law, no matter how corrupt they may be. Money, after all, is money.

Well yeah, no shit. It's all rhetorical. My point is, even if you have a massive fighting force, it's useless if it has no direction and no clear leader. Chaos is going to favor the small, mobile, and precise government/military force.

In the case that Billy Bob is sitting in his house with his shotgun held close, waiting for Big Brother to come for him ... well, if they want to kill Billy, they can do it from a mile away before he even has a chance to blink. That little shotgun isn't going to do him any good. If they want to sneak into his house and bug it, they're just going to wait for him to leave. Meanwhile his gun is sitting there, collecting dust. See what I mean? In no circumstance does Billy's gun actually help protect him from the government.

Who said the resistance to such an attempt would be sitting home waiting?

And you'd be surprised how quickly a sufficiently disciplined group can be put together.

Are you 'underscoring the importance of concealed carry'? No wait... Open carry... or is it both concealed carry and open carry????? Crafty one you... gonna be up all night pondering this...

 

[John Shaw]

Last line of defense against what? Our own government? Boyo, the government could wipe your entire family off the map in one day and no one would ever know what happened to you. No number of weapons are going to protect you against the government. We don't even know what kinds of weapons they have cooked up in their military R&D. You're going to stop the big bad gov with a little semi-auto? Haha.

It's doubtful. But the beauty is we'll never find out because there are 300 million guns in the hands of it's citizens.

And of course none of that matters because the bottom line is that's how the Founding Fathers saw it, and that's how the Constitution sees it.

To actually harness that power, you'd have to organize it. Think you're gonna organize 100 million people? 10 million? 1 million? Probably not, huh? How about 100,000? Very unlikely in the heat of the inevitable mass panic and confusion that would surely ensue were the government to take military action against the American people. Okay, so maybe 10,000? Okay, maybe you could actually get 10,000 people to form a coherent fighting force.

Oh yeah, right; 10,000 people ain't jack shit. And chances are you couldn't even manage that. It's hard enough trying to get a few hundred organized over something stupid and (relatively) risk free like a company party. Meanwhile, the military is already highly organized, well-trained, and armed with the best weapons and technology. They would win before the American people even knew what the hell was happening. The best you could hope for is some kind of war of attrition, and then it would be less about guns and more about the spirit, the soul, and the will to win at any cost.

The 2nd amendment is not going to help you "fight the government". Please get that through your thick heads.

Dude, you are wasting your time. I know the history. I know the intent. That's all that matters.

Okay. Keep telling yourself that, lol. Meanwhile, people with brains will remain fully aware that having a gun won't do shit for you should the government come calling. Maybe you'll be able to stop a burglar or scare off a bear, though.

So remind us how long has the US military been fighting against sheep herders in Afghanistan?

Fighting them and killing them for decades with minimal casualties (on their side).

Oh, and they wouldn't have to drag their equipment halfway across the world to fight in the U.S. Plus, Americans just don't have the complete lack of respect for human life that the Taliban have. A few drone strikes and they'd fall in line before the first week is out. You'd have some lunatics fighting the good fight years later, but they'd be no better off than the Taliban; hiding in the dark, waiting for a day that will never come.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

These tragedies are sad but gun violence and gun accidents are the cost of freedom and liberty. We the people are the last line of defense. That's how our Founding Fathers saw it, and that's how the Constitution sees it.

Last line of defense against what? Our own government? Boyo, the government could wipe your entire family off the map in one day and no one would ever know what happened to you. No number of weapons are going to protect you against the government. We don't even know what kinds of weapons they have cooked up in their military R&D. You're going to stop the big bad gov with a little semi-auto? Haha.

Would that it never happens here, but for the sake or argument, consider that if only 50% of gun owners decided to resist, they would number in excess of 50,000,000. A good percentage have military or police combat training. Many individuals and groups have been collecting weapons for years.

Total active US military personnel numbers under 4,000,000. Reserves equal about 800,000. Do the math.

It's doubtful in such a situation that local police would join them, since they and their families have to live in the same neighborhoods with the resistors.

We have seen in the Middle East in recent years the potential of insurgent armies. Also, it is unlikely the national government would be willing to lay waste large portions of America in order to force an unconstitutional point of law, no matter how corrupt they may be. Money, after all, is money.

Well yeah, no shit. It's all rhetorical. My point is, even if you have a massive fighting force, it's useless if it has no direction and no clear leader. Chaos is going to favor the small, mobile, and precise government/military force.

In the case that Billy Bob is sitting in his house with his shotgun held close, waiting for Big Brother to come for him ... well, if they want to kill Billy, they can do it from a mile away before he even has a chance to blink. That little shotgun isn't going to do him any good. If they want to sneak into his house and bug it, they're just going to wait for him to leave. Meanwhile his gun is sitting there, collecting dust. See what I mean? In no circumstance does Billy's gun actually help protect him from the government.

Who said the resistance to such an attempt would be sitting home waiting?

And you'd be surprised how quickly a sufficiently disciplined group can be put together.

Well if the gov is coming after you, they probably aren't going to let you know they're coming, or when. Billy Bob in my scenario is hugging his shotty because that's what he does every day, wearing his trusty tinfoil hat and hoarding 3 years of rations in an underground bunker.

Resistance would be active before such a decision was even made. Are you older than 10?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

These tragedies are sad but gun violence and gun accidents are the cost of freedom and liberty. We the people are the last line of defense. That's how our Founding Fathers saw it, and that's how the Constitution sees it.

Last line of defense against what? Our own government? Boyo, the government could wipe your entire family off the map in one day and no one would ever know what happened to you. No number of weapons are going to protect you against the government. We don't even know what kinds of weapons they have cooked up in their military R&D. You're going to stop the big bad gov with a little semi-auto? Haha.

Would that it never happens here, but for the sake or argument, consider that if only 50% of gun owners decided to resist, they would number in excess of 50,000,000. A good percentage have military or police combat training. Many individuals and groups have been collecting weapons for years.

Total active US military personnel numbers under 4,000,000. Reserves equal about 800,000. Do the math.

It's doubtful in such a situation that local police would join them, since they and their families have to live in the same neighborhoods with the resistors.

We have seen in the Middle East in recent years the potential of insurgent armies. Also, it is unlikely the national government would be willing to lay waste large portions of America in order to force an unconstitutional point of law, no matter how corrupt they may be. Money, after all, is money.

Well yeah, no shit. It's all rhetorical. My point is, even if you have a massive fighting force, it's useless if it has no direction and no clear leader. Chaos is going to favor the small, mobile, and precise government/military force.

In the case that Billy Bob is sitting in his house with his shotgun held close, waiting for Big Brother to come for him ... well, if they want to kill Billy, they can do it from a mile away before he even has a chance to blink. That little shotgun isn't going to do him any good. If they want to sneak into his house and bug it, they're just going to wait for him to leave. Meanwhile his gun is sitting there, collecting dust. See what I mean? In no circumstance does Billy's gun actually help protect him from the government.

Who said the resistance to such an attempt would be sitting home waiting?

And you'd be surprised how quickly a sufficiently disciplined group can be put together.

Are you 'underscoring the importance of concealed carry'? No wait... Open carry... or is it both concealed carry and open carry????? Crafty one you... gonna be up all night pondering this...

Nah. Just saying there will be no national gun confiscation. This is all purely academic.

 

[John Shaw]

Last line of defense against what? Our own government? Boyo, the government could wipe your entire family off the map in one day and no one would ever know what happened to you. No number of weapons are going to protect you against the government. We don't even know what kinds of weapons they have cooked up in their military R&D. You're going to stop the big bad gov with a little semi-auto? Haha.

Would that it never happens here, but for the sake or argument, consider that if only 50% of gun owners decided to resist, they would number in excess of 50,000,000. A good percentage have military or police combat training. Many individuals and groups have been collecting weapons for years.

Total active US military personnel numbers under 4,000,000. Reserves equal about 800,000. Do the math.

It's doubtful in such a situation that local police would join them, since they and their families have to live in the same neighborhoods with the resistors.

We have seen in the Middle East in recent years the potential of insurgent armies. Also, it is unlikely the national government would be willing to lay waste large portions of America in order to force an unconstitutional point of law, no matter how corrupt they may be. Money, after all, is money.

Well yeah, no shit. It's all rhetorical. My point is, even if you have a massive fighting force, it's useless if it has no direction and no clear leader. Chaos is going to favor the small, mobile, and precise government/military force.

In the case that Billy Bob is sitting in his house with his shotgun held close, waiting for Big Brother to come for him ... well, if they want to kill Billy, they can do it from a mile away before he even has a chance to blink. That little shotgun isn't going to do him any good. If they want to sneak into his house and bug it, they're just going to wait for him to leave. Meanwhile his gun is sitting there, collecting dust. See what I mean? In no circumstance does Billy's gun actually help protect him from the government.

Who said the resistance to such an attempt would be sitting home waiting?

And you'd be surprised how quickly a sufficiently disciplined group can be put together.

Well if the gov is coming after you, they probably aren't going to let you know they're coming, or when. Billy Bob in my scenario is hugging his shotty because that's what he does every day, wearing his trusty tinfoil hat and hoarding 3 years of rations in an underground bunker.

Resistance would be active before such a decision was even made. Are you older than 10?

You are conflating two different scenarios; one, the People vs. the U.S. goverment. And the second, you vs. the U.S. government. In either case, it won't be guns that save either you or the People.

 

[Wyatt earp]

It's doubtful. But the beauty is we'll never find out because there are 300 million guns in the hands of it's citizens.

And of course none of that matters because the bottom line is that's how the Founding Fathers saw it, and that's how the Constitution sees it.

To actually harness that power, you'd have to organize it. Think you're gonna organize 100 million people? 10 million? 1 million? Probably not, huh? How about 100,000? Very unlikely in the heat of the inevitable mass panic and confusion that would surely ensue were the government to take military action against the American people. Okay, so maybe 10,000? Okay, maybe you could actually get 10,000 people to form a coherent fighting force.

Oh yeah, right; 10,000 people ain't jack shit. And chances are you couldn't even manage that. It's hard enough trying to get a few hundred organized over something stupid and (relatively) risk free like a company party. Meanwhile, the military is already highly organized, well-trained, and armed with the best weapons and technology. They would win before the American people even knew what the hell was happening. The best you could hope for is some kind of war of attrition, and then it would be less about guns and more about the spirit, the soul, and the will to win at any cost.

The 2nd amendment is not going to help you "fight the government". Please get that through your thick heads.

Dude, you are wasting your time. I know the history. I know the intent. That's all that matters.

Okay. Keep telling yourself that, lol. Meanwhile, people with brains will remain fully aware that having a gun won't do shit for you should the government come calling. Maybe you'll be able to stop a burglar or scare off a bear, though.

So remind us how long has the US military been fighting against sheep herders in Afghanistan?

Fighting them and killing them for decades with minimal casualties (on their side).

Oh, and they wouldn't have to drag their equipment halfway across the world to fight in the U.S. Plus, Americans just don't have the complete lack of respect for human life that the Taliban have. A few drone strikes and they'd fall in line before the first week is out. You'd have some lunatics fighting the good fight years later, but they'd be no better off than the Taliban; hiding in the dark, waiting for a day that will never come.

Oh please , they military would be scared shitless vs US.

 

[KeiserC]

Would that it never happens here, but for the sake or argument, consider that if only 50% of gun owners decided to resist, they would number in excess of 50,000,000. A good percentage have military or police combat training. Many individuals and groups have been collecting weapons for years.

Total active US military personnel numbers under 4,000,000. Reserves equal about 800,000. Do the math.

It's doubtful in such a situation that local police would join them, since they and their families have to live in the same neighborhoods with the resistors.

We have seen in the Middle East in recent years the potential of insurgent armies. Also, it is unlikely the national government would be willing to lay waste large portions of America in order to force an unconstitutional point of law, no matter how corrupt they may be. Money, after all, is money.

Well yeah, no shit. It's all rhetorical. My point is, even if you have a massive fighting force, it's useless if it has no direction and no clear leader. Chaos is going to favor the small, mobile, and precise government/military force.

In the case that Billy Bob is sitting in his house with his shotgun held close, waiting for Big Brother to come for him ... well, if they want to kill Billy, they can do it from a mile away before he even has a chance to blink. That little shotgun isn't going to do him any good. If they want to sneak into his house and bug it, they're just going to wait for him to leave. Meanwhile his gun is sitting there, collecting dust. See what I mean? In no circumstance does Billy's gun actually help protect him from the government.

Who said the resistance to such an attempt would be sitting home waiting?

And you'd be surprised how quickly a sufficiently disciplined group can be put together.

Well if the gov is coming after you, they probably aren't going to let you know they're coming, or when. Billy Bob in my scenario is hugging his shotty because that's what he does every day, wearing his trusty tinfoil hat and hoarding 3 years of rations in an underground bunker.

Resistance would be active before such a decision was even made. Are you older than 10?

You are conflating two different scenarios; one, the People vs. the U.S. goverment. And the second, you vs. the U.S. government. In either case, it won't be guns that save either you or the People.

'Nahhh' man, I 'aint' conflating "two different scenarios" .... Same scenario.., viewed from ea. respective side... LOL. Sorry for stepping in.. not my post you were addressing... just thought you might have hit your head, in a daze or something...

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Everyone thinks they know how they'll react in a situation like that. In reality, his body would probably just freeze up and he would just be another helpless lamb among many. Even if he managed to draw his weapon, he'd be more likely to shoot an innocent person than the actual shooter.

Or be taken as a perp and shot himself.

Really? How many concealed carry persons were killed by the police by mistake last year? I am sure you can Google that.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Would that it never happens here, but for the sake or argument, consider that if only 50% of gun owners decided to resist, they would number in excess of 50,000,000. A good percentage have military or police combat training. Many individuals and groups have been collecting weapons for years.

Total active US military personnel numbers under 4,000,000. Reserves equal about 800,000. Do the math.

It's doubtful in such a situation that local police would join them, since they and their families have to live in the same neighborhoods with the resistors.

We have seen in the Middle East in recent years the potential of insurgent armies. Also, it is unlikely the national government would be willing to lay waste large portions of America in order to force an unconstitutional point of law, no matter how corrupt they may be. Money, after all, is money.

Well yeah, no shit. It's all rhetorical. My point is, even if you have a massive fighting force, it's useless if it has no direction and no clear leader. Chaos is going to favor the small, mobile, and precise government/military force.

In the case that Billy Bob is sitting in his house with his shotgun held close, waiting for Big Brother to come for him ... well, if they want to kill Billy, they can do it from a mile away before he even has a chance to blink. That little shotgun isn't going to do him any good. If they want to sneak into his house and bug it, they're just going to wait for him to leave. Meanwhile his gun is sitting there, collecting dust. See what I mean? In no circumstance does Billy's gun actually help protect him from the government.

Who said the resistance to such an attempt would be sitting home waiting?

And you'd be surprised how quickly a sufficiently disciplined group can be put together.

Well if the gov is coming after you, they probably aren't going to let you know they're coming, or when. Billy Bob in my scenario is hugging his shotty because that's what he does every day, wearing his trusty tinfoil hat and hoarding 3 years of rations in an underground bunker.

Resistance would be active before such a decision was even made. Are you older than 10?

You are conflating two different scenarios; one, the People vs. the U.S. goverment. And the second, you vs. the U.S. government. In either case, it won't be guns that save either you or the People.

A scenario was offered, and I gave an opinion. In reality, you'll never see such a scenario.

I am not "versus" the US Government. Just Democrats, Democrats who call themselves Republicans, and their idiot minions.

Not a big fan of Republicans either, but at least they are not so openly and diametrically opposed to the Constitution.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

To actually harness that power, you'd have to organize it. Think you're gonna organize 100 million people? 10 million? 1 million? Probably not, huh? How about 100,000? Very unlikely in the heat of the inevitable mass panic and confusion that would surely ensue were the government to take military action against the American people. Okay, so maybe 10,000? Okay, maybe you could actually get 10,000 people to form a coherent fighting force.

Oh yeah, right; 10,000 people ain't jack shit. And chances are you couldn't even manage that. It's hard enough trying to get a few hundred organized over something stupid and (relatively) risk free like a company party. Meanwhile, the military is already highly organized, well-trained, and armed with the best weapons and technology. They would win before the American people even knew what the hell was happening. The best you could hope for is some kind of war of attrition, and then it would be less about guns and more about the spirit, the soul, and the will to win at any cost.

The 2nd amendment is not going to help you "fight the government". Please get that through your thick heads.

Dude, you are wasting your time. I know the history. I know the intent. That's all that matters.

Okay. Keep telling yourself that, lol. Meanwhile, people with brains will remain fully aware that having a gun won't do shit for you should the government come calling. Maybe you'll be able to stop a burglar or scare off a bear, though.

So remind us how long has the US military been fighting against sheep herders in Afghanistan?

Fighting them and killing them for decades with minimal casualties (on their side).

Oh, and they wouldn't have to drag their equipment halfway across the world to fight in the U.S. Plus, Americans just don't have the complete lack of respect for human life that the Taliban have. A few drone strikes and they'd fall in line before the first week is out. You'd have some lunatics fighting the good fight years later, but they'd be no better off than the Taliban; hiding in the dark, waiting for a day that will never come.

Oh please , they military would be scared shitless vs US.

It's more likely they would join the opposition.

 

[John Shaw]

To actually harness that power, you'd have to organize it. Think you're gonna organize 100 million people? 10 million? 1 million? Probably not, huh? How about 100,000? Very unlikely in the heat of the inevitable mass panic and confusion that would surely ensue were the government to take military action against the American people. Okay, so maybe 10,000? Okay, maybe you could actually get 10,000 people to form a coherent fighting force.

Oh yeah, right; 10,000 people ain't jack shit. And chances are you couldn't even manage that. It's hard enough trying to get a few hundred organized over something stupid and (relatively) risk free like a company party. Meanwhile, the military is already highly organized, well-trained, and armed with the best weapons and technology. They would win before the American people even knew what the hell was happening. The best you could hope for is some kind of war of attrition, and then it would be less about guns and more about the spirit, the soul, and the will to win at any cost.

The 2nd amendment is not going to help you "fight the government". Please get that through your thick heads.

Dude, you are wasting your time. I know the history. I know the intent. That's all that matters.

Okay. Keep telling yourself that, lol. Meanwhile, people with brains will remain fully aware that having a gun won't do shit for you should the government come calling. Maybe you'll be able to stop a burglar or scare off a bear, though.

So remind us how long has the US military been fighting against sheep herders in Afghanistan?

Fighting them and killing them for decades with minimal casualties (on their side).

Oh, and they wouldn't have to drag their equipment halfway across the world to fight in the U.S. Plus, Americans just don't have the complete lack of respect for human life that the Taliban have. A few drone strikes and they'd fall in line before the first week is out. You'd have some lunatics fighting the good fight years later, but they'd be no better off than the Taliban; hiding in the dark, waiting for a day that will never come.

Oh please , they military would be scared shitless vs US.

More likely that the military would just refuse to fire on U.S. citizens, actually. But don't tell your crazy conspiracy theory-lovin' survivalists that. They might be inclined to rejoin society!

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

This latest mass shooting was in my neck of the woods.

What's got to happen before guns for all gets shitcanned?

Research shows that a majority of people will have to be exposed to a mass shooting incident before attitudes change sufficiently. Until then its in the 'hasn't happened in my back yard' category, which is not enough incentive to reduce easy access to handguns and military style semi automatics, (mssa)...

Using data from multiple sources on mass public shootings merged with the 2010 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES), we show that increased proximity to a mass shooting is associated with heightened public support for stricter government regulation of firearms. Importantly, we show that this main effect does not vary by partisanship.
https://www.cambridge.org/​

All the more reason to be trained, armed, and to carry every day. It hasn't happened in my back yard but if it does, I will be ready to counter whatever threat with an immediate response.

Sure ya will, Rambo. Lol.

Why wouldn't he? That's the point of carrying to protect yourself, your children and property

Everyone thinks they know how they'll react in a situation like that. In reality, his body would probably just freeze up and he would just be another helpless lamb among many. Even if he managed to draw his weapon, he'd be more likely to shoot an innocent person than the actual shooter.

Nah. I use a .45. Less chance of pass-through.