The government is not, repeat NOT scared of your guns. Here’s proof.

[dutch508]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024540020

riqster (7,079 posts)

The government is not, repeat NOT scared of your guns. Here’s proof.
 

Of course the monkies posts no real proof. The thread then devolves into what the coming Second American Civil War would look like.

Autumn (14,711 posts)
2. Look at the weapons the US military has. Do they think their 50 or 100 assorted guns

are worth a **** against the military's weakest firepower? A mouse facing off against a hawk.

Which is a really great arguement for the Sceond Amendment, IMHO.

badtoworse (4,344 posts)
10. If it ever came to that, I doubt it would be just a few militias.

It might start that way, but I think it would quickly spiral into something much bigger with a large portion of the population siding with the militias and helping them. That is how civil wars start. A scenario like that would be extremely difficult to contain.

 


The leftists just assume the military will be on 'their' side.

jeff47 (10,691 posts)
15. Doubtful.

The US still cares somewhat about our reputation in Afghanistan, so we aren't being as brutal as we could be.

If the battle was for the US government's survival, as in your proposed civil war, they would unleash far more upon the rebels.

We'd be back to carpet-bombing cities and other massive destruction to break the rebellion. I'm not completely sure nukes would be off the table - they could get used as part of a last-ditch effort. Because it really doesn't matter if your government behaved relatively nicely when it no longer exists. Survival first, then deal with the backlash.

At which point the massively superior weaponry means your militia gets blown to smithereens, leaving an unorganized, low-grade insurrection. And that can be contained well enough to keep the government in power.

badtoworse (4,344 posts)
32. So the government would carpet bomb our own cities?

If that happened, I think anyone who was on the fence would quickly make up their mind.

jeff47 (10,691 posts)
35. Oh no, those are evil 'rebel' cities.

So they deserved to be carpet bombed.

We're talking about a situation like Syria, not Afghanistan. Assad has bombed his own people. Including his supporters. And he's used chemical weapons. He's still got about half the country behind him. His government is fighting for survival, so they're willing to do ANYTHING to win.

In your theoretical new US civil war, if the government thinks it will lose it will do ANYTHING to win.

I have no doubt Barry would love to turn the military loose on his enemies on the right. I strongly beleive that is why we are seeing a quiet purge of the military as we speak.

Travis_0004 (1,370 posts)
103. I doubt it

First off, you are assuming that the US military would be willing to bomb US cities.

If that order was given, you would likely see a large portion of the military defect, and a lot would take their fancy equipment with them.

Also, in a civil war similar to the 1850's it be pretty safe to go in and bomb weapons factories, etc. But in a civil war like today, you might have one person who supports the revolution, living right next to a person against it. Are you going to bomb both of them?

loli phabay (5,510 posts)
58. there seems to be a belief that the military etc would happily follow orders to shoot their neighbou

like all civil wars there would be mass disobedience and desertions from whatever stripe of government ordered them to carpet bomb US cities. as to this fantasy that all the rebels would be middle aged fat guys running around there are shit loads of combat hardened disaffected people ou there and other competent nutters to make a fight of it. we would see car bombs, infrastructure attacks and the whole nine yards if it ever came to it. also this glee that the US military woukd happily kill all the militia members, remember if they can kill all right wingers at the drop of a hat whats to stop a radically different government ordering them to kill all with a left political slant. it is scarey to see people wish for a civil war, and the fact that they would sit safely in their basement wishing death on their neighbours makes them no more different from the people tjey want destroyed.

This is what the leftists do best.

CANDO (1,542 posts)
41. What the gunhumpers fail to understand in such a scenario....

I and many millions of gun owning liberals would be shooting your asses for trying to overthrow our government. We'd be helping the military. Bet you never considered that angle.

What you leftist ****s fail to realize is that Barry would have already collected your guns. You would have cheerfully turned them in when they asked. Bet you never thought of that.

[Carl]

Yet filthy,drug addled hippies that can`t be bothered to wipe themselves after they crap in the street think they are going to foment a leftist revolution. 

Trust me DUmbasses,you do not want this civil war you are stupidly certain you will survive.

[dutch508]

PatrynXX (3,134 posts)
22. Which is how

when Republicans have a chance they actually do take those guns away...

Imagine this. To Norway and a friend of my dads said America has the most liberal <----- rules in the world on guns. Conservatives would take this away.. Have no idea why I have Zombies who think otherwise. Although it's really not funny walking into a gun show and having almost every table say if I'm a democrat I will not be served. So who's banning guns??

Is nads posting under a new sockpuppet?

Lizzie Poppet (3,678 posts)
73. I can't agree.

As I said, "a certain non-insignificant percentage" does indeed abandon civilized behavior in disaster situations. To argue otherwise is to deny that looting (etc.) takes place under these conditions. That's absurd.

Are the majority disinclined to do this? Of course. I already stated that.

You seem more interested in making this a racial discussion, though. While that's certainly a legitimate area of discussion (and one in which I suspect we'd have little disagreement), it's not the focus of my point, nor is it a conversation I'm particularly interested in having.

So I guess we're done. Best wishes!

Spitfire of ATJ (13,481 posts)
74. Define "looting".

  from this post:

Spitfire of ATJ (13,481 posts)
72. "A certain, not-insignificant percentage of the population goes feral."

But it DOESN'T.

People are very patient after a disaster to get the comforts of civilization BACK.

There is this myth popular amongst white people that they INVENTED civilization and the other races are little more than trained primitives. It's the mindset of the "Great White Hunter" and the Apartheid Government in South Africa. We had people like Cheney claiming is was nonsense to think black people could govern themselves. On the contrary, according to the mindset, those types should be under constant guard to prevent an uprising.

Face it. A LOT of this "civilization falling" is just CODE for a race war that bigots WANT because they dream of the day when white people will take to the streets and execute all non-whites on sight.

Such a thing has happened before in this country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulsa_race_riot

Then there's this gem of history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bear_River_Massacre (Read the section: Massacre and actions of U.S. soldiers)

As far as the whole "reverting to savages" it seems white people are the ones to do it and all this talk of "freedom" is the freedom to run amok.

[Carl]

The LA riots after the Rodney King verdict never happened?

Well at least they were balanced out by the riots after the OJ verdict...oh wait,uhmmm

[JohnnyReb]

I guess it's "Kill 'em all, let GOD sort 'em out".

[NHSparky]

Funny, but I would think that a relatively simple weapon in the hand of a well-trained and disciplined person would be in many cases as effective or more so than a high-tech military-style weapon in the hands of a retard.

Case in point--I'll take the veteran who knows how to use a .300 Win Mag over some dipshit hippie who sprays and prays with an M-4.  Just my opinion.

[Big Dog]

If you know your enemy and know yourself, you will never be imperiled in a hundred battles. If you do not know your enemy but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one. If you do not know your enemy nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.
-Sun Tzu, The Art of War

The DUmmies are an a world of shit.

CANDO (1,542 posts)
41. What the gunhumpers fail to understand in such a scenario....

I and many millions of gun owning liberals would be shooting your asses for trying to overthrow our government. We'd be helping the military. Bet you never considered that angle.

DUmmy, I'm your huckleberry. That's just my game.

[DumbAss Tanker]

We'd be back to carpet-bombing cities

Go for it, Billy Mitchell Junior.  They're your centers of gravity, not ours.

The government is not, repeat NOT scared of your guns. Here’s proof.

The militarized police state tactical response to everything from traffic stops to checking farms for unpasteurized milk tends to indicate otherwise.

[NHSparky]

I and many millions of gun owning liberals

That was almost too funny right there.

[BlueStateSaint]

That was almost too funny right there.

He means 'hoodrats,' Sparky.

[NHSparky]

He means 'hoodrats,' Sparky.

Again, too funny for words, considering there is about zip-point-shit chance of them ever standing up to an armed citizen.

[EagleKeeper]

I don't know.

I figure if you were to rigorously ignore recent history you might be able to convince yourself that the state is unassailable.

Whatever works for the DUmmies. It's what make them DUmmies.


 

[98ZJUSMC]

The leftists just assume the military will be on 'their' side.

They do and they don't.  Witness the recent "retiring" of senior officers deemed questionable by the bureaucratic overlords and fired by Barqui.  As far as the overpowering awesomeness of US firepower,..... quite true.  It can be gruesomely effective.

In a stand up fight.  

You would have to be beyond irretrievably insane to want to do that.  That's not the plan, (D)Ummies.  Zap a few government officials, journalists, etc and see what develops.  Then?

You blend into the landscape.

History, idiots.  History.

Go for it, Billy Mitchell Junior.  They're your centers of gravity, not ours.

Exactly.  Go for it.  I would applaud such overreach, as that would completely shift the sympathies of most any fence-sitter.

CANDO (1,542 posts)
41. What the gunhumpers fail to understand in such a scenario....

I and many millions of gun owning liberals would be shooting your asses for trying to overthrow our government. We'd be helping the military. Bet you never considered that angle.

In my jungle, you're just another asshole.  You would die very quickly and no, the Military would be too busy disarming you to mess with us.  What makes you assume that they would assume that you are "helping" them?   

Dumbass.

[AprilRazz]

Travis_0004 (1,370 posts)
103. I doubt it

First off, you are assuming that the US military would be willing to bomb US cities.

If that order was given, you would likely see a large portion of the military defect, and a lot would take their fancy equipment with them.

Also, in a civil war similar to the 1850's it be pretty safe to go in and bomb weapons factories, etc. But in a civil war like today, you might have one person who supports the revolution, living right next to a person against it. Are you going to bomb both of them?

Think you are about a decade off there.
What the primitives don't think about is that those who may not be current gun owners that would be willing to pick up a gun to defend their homes. Most of those who fought in the civil war in the 1860's for the CSA were not slave owners, but those that were defending their homes against a hostile invading force.

[98ZJUSMC]

Also, in a civil war similar to the 1850's

Think you are about a decade off there.
What the primitives don't think about is that those who may not be current gun owners that would be willing to pick up a gun to defend their homes. Most of those who fought in the civil war in the 1860's for the CSA were not slave owners, but those that were defending their homes against a hostile invading force.

Now, now......these are our edJukayshuny bettors.  It must be true.  

 

I'm not completely sure nukes would be off the table - they could get used as part of a last-ditch effort.

Oh my.....the little fascists sure do love their escalation.  Nukes.....   

[AprilRazz]

Now, now......these are our edJukayshuny bettors.  It must be true.   

 


Oh my.....the little fascists sure do love their escalation.  Nukes.....   

What do you expect from a bunch who gained their military experience from a playstation?

[NHSparky]

Oh my.....the little fascists sure do love their escalation.  Nukes.....   

Remember that horrible show about a decade ago called, "Jericho"?  Remember how the storyline went, with those evil right-wingers dropping a boatload of nukes on their own country?

That's what these DUmbasses fap to every single night.

[Mr Mannn]

If the govt wasn't afraid of our guns, then there would be no push to take them away.

Thus we learn the truth. The govt is scared to death of privately held guns.

[NHSparky]

If the govt wasn't afraid of our guns, then there would be no push to take them away.

^^^^^ This.

[BlueStateSaint]

If the govt wasn't afraid of our guns, then there would be no push to take them away.

Thus we learn the truth. The govt is scared to death of privately held guns.

Target!  Re-engage!

[DumbAss Tanker]

If the govt wasn't afraid of our guns, then there would be no push to take them away.

Thus we learn the truth. The govt is scared to death of privately held guns.

Well said!

[Airwolf]

My question is this. How many governments have been taken down since the 1960's when the people revolted and over powered or the military joined the civilians in helping take down the government? More then the Dummies realize I bet. Just looking at Syria you can see that it's taking them over three years now and not much has shifted the balance one way or the other in favor of the Government.

[diesel driver]

I could care less if the government was "scared" of my guns.

I prefer the government be scared of me.

[JohnnyReb]

I could care less if the government was "scared" of my guns.

I prefer the government be scared of me.

They are....that's why they want to disarm you.

[AprilRazz]

There is a very smart lady that I have quoted in my signature. Think I will shine a light on what she said here...."How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual... as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of." Suzanna Hupp