Can guns protect us against tyranny?

redwood · Jan 21, 2013

myp said:
Certainly not the only variable.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2013/01/can-.html

Well...take about 400 Gau-8's...wrap an A-10 Warthog around them...and you are at least in the game.

A bunch of trailer trash wanna be's with AK's....a news story and some widows + orphans.

If...off in the distance we manage to let a real tyrant take power...let me know when there is a vast general strike and 100,000+ in the streets of every major city.

Now? The big deal is...the PRESIDENT is HALFWAYS a NEGRO....Oh...dang! :cry:and the Sociopathhs may need to make do with a 10 rd Mag next time they go on a killin' spree. Well...DANG.

I figure we're grown up enough to deal with such minor stuff.

redwood · Jan 21, 2013

misterveritis said:
Do you have any idea how close a contest it was? No guns, no ammunition, no cannon, no French, no victory.

Every revolution is substantially helped by outside forces, usually after they have proven themselves able to survive long enough to win.

One million discipline troops are no matched for an armed, fighting populace of 50 million. We have the Second Amendment to the US Constitution because of the fear of a large, standing army under the control of an out of control Executive. This is timely. Very, very timely.

Have you lost your mind?

In the long gone past..."guns" took 30 sec to load and fire and had a range of maybe 100 yd. Civilians ...actually were more apt to have rifles ( more range,accuracy-slower loading) but...basically in a battle of 100 guyas on each side...at least the hardware was similar.

Some bunch of amateur beer buddies vs a Marine regiment....not close. Add in Air power.... more not close. The fact is the wannabe traitor/terrorist bunch would likely get taken out by the local Tac Squad and the FBI. They would not last till round 2 vs the National Guard or rd 3...Army...Marines..Air Force.

misterveritis · Jan 21, 2013

Iolo said:
The 'French' bit is the one that counts. Armed fighting populace my American elbow! Gang of third-rate hams! Capitalists control your working lives, your private lives, your opinions and your government, and the bang-bangs have nothing to do with it.

The French played a role. Nothing more. One can measure a person based on their hates. I hate tyrants. I hate Marxists. And you, you hate capitalism, free markets and a free people.

misterveritis · Jan 21, 2013

redwood said:
Have you lost your mind?

Let me check....nope. It is stifll there. Thanks for asking.

In the long gone past..."guns" took 30 sec to load and fire and had a range of maybe 100 yd. Civilians ...actually were more apt to have rifles ( more range,accuracy-slower loading) but...basically in a battle of 100 guyas on each side...at least the hardware was similar.

Some bunch of amateur beer buddies vs a Marine regiment....not close. Add in Air power.... more not close. The fact is the wannabe traitor/terrorist bunch would likely get taken out by the local Tac Squad and the FBI. They would not last till round 2 vs the National Guard or rd 3...Army...Marines..Air Force.

The nature of the infantry weapon of the era is immaterial to the discussion. What is relevant is the essential equivalency of the basic infantry arm of the day.

An armed populace of 50 million with just a few million active fighters would be hard to defeat. With a few more millions an armed populace would be impossible to beat. Add in another ten to twenty million passively assisting the rebels and the rebellion suddenly has a very good chance of winning.

I never referred to a "bunch." Think millions. That was the point of the Second Amendment. That is why it is a relevant antidote to a standing army under a despotic executive.

clax · Jan 22, 2013

misterveritis said:
Let me check....nope. It is stifll there. Thanks for asking.

The nature of the infantry weapon of the era is immaterial to the discussion. What is relevant is the essential equivalency of the basic infantry arm of the day.

An armed populace of 50 million with just a few million active fighters would be hard to defeat. With a few more millions an armed populace would be impossible to beat. Add in another ten to twenty million passively assisting the rebels and the rebellion suddenly has a very good chance of winning.

I never referred to a "bunch." Think millions. That was the point of the Second Amendment. That is why it is a relevant antidote to a standing army under a despotic executive.

Not to mention the military is not a collection of weapons to suit the whims of some dictator that would declare war on its own nation, but pro gun conservatives who fight to preserve our nation. I think most of the military would turn on corrupt leaders.

Iolo · Jan 22, 2013

misterveritis said:
The French played a role. Nothing more. One can measure a person based on their hates. I hate tyrants. I hate Marxists. And you, you hate capitalism, free markets and a free people.

I'm all for a free people, but you, manifestly, are not that thing: you are conformists with opinions that come straight from the factory in cardboard boxes. You wouldn't know a tyrant if you met one, because he would show you his dental work and act 'sincere'. You've never been allowed to know anything about Marx, as you know, and that indicates just how 'free' you are. To suppose that a brainwashed gang like you could ever do more than rush out to lynch those who oppose your masters is quite silly, and to suppose that you could beat trained troops is ludicrous. Sorry, but that's the way it is.

clax · Jan 22, 2013

Iolo said:
I'm all for a free people, but you, manifestly, are not that thing: you are conformists with opinions that come straight from the factory in cardboard boxes. You wouldn't know a tyrant if you met one, because he would show you his dental work and act 'sincere'. You've never been allowed to know anything about Marx, as you know, and that indicates just how 'free' you are. To suppose that a brainwashed gang like you could ever do more than rush out to lynch those who oppose your masters is quite silly, and to suppose that you could beat trained troops is ludicrous. Sorry, but that's the way it is.

trained troops out numbered 1000 to 1? I don't care what training anyone has, drastic out numbering will always be a tactical advantage. Besides some civilians are better trained on superior weapons. You can haves your crummy AR 15 I prefer my 30.06, I can drill holes from 400 yards. Plus I know how to make more accurate bullets. I have more training than an average troop, I have better weapons. So yes some old billy bob bumpkin can provide a real challenge for several troops, I'm the end I would die, but I'd prefer to die free than live in shackles.

chris7375 · Jan 22, 2013

myp said:
Certainly not the only variable.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2013/01/can-.html

I would have to say one would not know unless it happens. As of right now most of the country does not feel we live in a government that is a Tyranny. Though I am far from an Obama supporter and don't like most of his policies I still think we are not tyrannical.

As far as the example the used he should find better ones IMHO. Chavez 90% of people in Venezuela support him and his government.

Plenty of people fight to put down tyrannical governments and have won. It is in the eye of the beholder. For example they use to point out how a tyrannical government can't be thrown out do they research it throughly? It looks to me that they haven't.

Did the people support the government that was being overthrown or do they favor the people's view overthrowing the government. Those that over throw a government we find tyrannical may not be in the view of the people of that country.

Iolo · Jan 22, 2013

clax said:
trained troops out numbered 1000 to 1? I don't care what training anyone has, drastic out numbering will always be a tactical advantage. Besides some civilians are better trained on superior weapons. You can haves your crummy AR 15 I prefer my 30.06, I can drill holes from 400 yards. Plus I know how to make more accurate bullets. I have more training than an average troop, I have better weapons. So yes some old billy bob bumpkin can provide a real challenge for several troops, I'm the end I would die, but I'd prefer to die free than live in shackles.

How many of the cowboys would even come out from under the bed? You are a crank, doubtless well known, so they'd pick you up at the start, probably using rockets to destroy your house. Grow up! Or die, if the real world frightens you too much.

clax · Jan 22, 2013

Iolo said:
How many of the cowboys would even come out from under the bed? You are a crank, doubtless well known, so they'd pick you up at the start, probably using rockets to destroy your house. Grow up! Or die, if the real world frightens you too much.

I guess I won this debate, using insults already lolo tsk tsk tsk.

I am not a cowboy our a crank. Rocket launchers are notoriously inaccurate and ineffective anti person weapons,

I am not the least bit frightened I go into the fight every day.

Why don't you try a little harder at your character assassinations so as not to appear foolish.

Iolo · Jan 22, 2013

clax said:
I guess I won this debate, using insults already lolo tsk tsk tsk.

I am not a cowboy our a crank. Rocket launchers are notoriously inaccurate and ineffective anti person weapons,

I am not the least bit frightened I go into the fight every day.

Why don't you try a little harder at your character assassinations so as not to appear foolish.

When I deal with foreign weirdoes (sorry, but what else are you?) I find it difficult to know what to say, except that they are perhaps a little unbalanced or, as we say in our local dialect, nuts.

tecoyah · Jan 22, 2013

Iolo said:
How many of the cowboys would even come out from under the bed? You are a crank, doubtless well known, so they'd pick you up at the start, probably using rockets to destroy your house. Grow up! Or die, if the real world frightens you too much.

You are borderline here....tread carefully

misterveritis · Jan 22, 2013

Do you have any evvidence to support your claim?

Iolo said:
I'm all for a free people,

Do you have any evidence to support this claim?

but you, manifestly, are not that thing: you are conformists with opinions that come straight from the factory in cardboard boxes.

Am I multiple people to you?

You wouldn't know a tyrant if you met one,

I have not met you but it is clear to me that you would love to be a tyrant. It is clear from your writings.

because he would show you his dental work and act 'sincere'. You've never been allowed to know anything about Marx, as you know, and that indicates just how 'free' you are.

What do you mean I have never been allowed to know anything about Marx? His collected writings, filling 50 volumes, are available on line. I read the three of his more "popular" pieces. It was sufficient. He was a kook. He was wrong about nearly everything he predicted. Perhaps he influenced Yogi Berra who was said to have said, "Predictions are hard. Especially about the future."

To suppose that a brainwashed gang like you could ever do more than rush out to lynch those who oppose your masters is quite silly, and to suppose that you could beat trained troops is ludicrous. Sorry, but that's the way it is.

I suppose we will have to wait to find out. Of course an armed populace can beat trained troops. Troops require food, water, fuel, other power... An armed populace can take those things away. An armed populace can kill one or two troops per week every week for years. When the time is right an armed populace can begin to win pitched battles against a weakened military.

You are quite wrong. It may be a lack of imagination or a lack of education about rebellions, civil wars and guerrilla wars.

clax · Jan 22, 2013

Iolo said:
When I deal with foreign weirdoes (sorry, but what else are you?) I find it difficult to know what to say, except that they are perhaps a little unbalanced or, as we say in our local dialect, nuts.

Good, I am glad you think that way, because if you think I am nuts I must be on the right track.

Iolo · Jan 31, 2013

clax said:
Good, I am glad you think that way, because if you think I am nuts I must be on the right track.

I would comment, but persons other than right-wing extremists are on a borderline here. I expect I'd be okay if I had a sub-machinegun.

clax · Jan 31, 2013

Iolo said:
I would comment, but persons other than right-wing extremists are on a borderline here. I expect I'd be okay if I had a sub-machinegun.

This isn't a debate anymore. I don't wish to continue.

Iolo · Jan 31, 2013

misterveritis said:
Do you have any evidence to support this claim?

Am I multiple people to you?

I have not met you but it is clear to me that you would love to be a tyrant. It is clear from your writings.

What do you mean I have never been allowed to know anything about Marx? His collected writings, filling 50 volumes, are available on line. I read the three of his more "popular" pieces. It was sufficient. He was a kook. He was wrong about nearly everything he predicted. Perhaps he influenced Yogi Berra who was said to have said, "Predictions are hard. Especially about the future."

I suppose we will have to wait to find out. Of course an armed populace can beat trained troops. Troops require food, water, fuel, other power... An armed populace can take those things away. An armed populace can kill one or two troops per week every week for years. When the time is right an armed populace can begin to win pitched battles against a weakened military.

You are quite wrong. It may be a lack of imagination or a lack of education about rebellions, civil wars and guerrilla wars.

I am prepared to bet, chum, that I have very much higher educational qualifications than yours, but so what? The key point is that some people think and others live in countries governed by conformist bullies who press their buttons to make them squeak, throwing them guns to make believe they are 'free'. Enjoy!

misterveritis · Jan 31, 2013

Iolo said:
I am prepared to bet, chum, that I have very much higher educational qualifications than yours, but so what? The key point is that some people think and others live in countries governed by conformist bullies who press their buttons to make them squeak, throwing them guns to make believe they are 'free'. Enjoy!

Then I have to assume you have at least one doctoral level degree.

You offer no evidence of high educational qualifications, whatever that means. Or did you mean that you believe you graduated from a better high school than I did?

One of the interesting things I heard today concerned the decline and fall of the Roman empire. It concerned the Germanic tribes. For them to be armed was the badge of a free man. If you lose the right to be armed you have also lost your freedom.

Chum.

Iolo · Feb 1, 2013

misterveritis said:
Then I have to assume you have at least one doctoral level degree.

You offer no evidence of high educational qualifications, whatever that means. Or did you mean that you believe you graduated from a better high school than I did?

One of the interesting things I heard today concerned the decline and fall of the Roman empire. It concerned the Germanic tribes. For them to be armed was the badge of a free man. If you lose the right to be armed you have also lost your freedom.

Chum.

That was often the case with ignorant barbarians. You are correct as to qualifications. So what?

clax · Feb 1, 2013

misterveritis said:
Then I have to assume you have at least one doctoral level degree.

You offer no evidence of high educational qualifications, whatever that means. Or did you mean that you believe you graduated from a better high school than I did?

One of the interesting things I heard today concerned the decline and fall of the Roman empire. It concerned the Germanic tribes. For them to be armed was the badge of a free man. If you lose the right to be armed you have also lost your freedom.

Chum.

Don't give him the satisfaction.

Can guns protect us against tyranny?

Similar threads