It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

So they want our guns...

page: 8
97
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 12:37 PM
link   

stormson
tell me something.

how would the average person, with no formal military training, stack up against a 6 yr army scout?

now tell me, if the army were to turn on the people, just how well would the people stack up against the army, considering that 90% of people have no formal military training? just using small arms? now add in all the goodies, like drones and tanks, what are the peoples chances?

now, just for giggles, imagine that all the restraints that we put on the army for places like iraq were removed. where the army became what it truly was meant to be, a conquering army? where they were told to roll in, pacify by any means, and move on?

just imagine how much chance the average person would have if the army was told to operate by wwii rules of engagement rather than the "hearts and minds" rules of today.

the average person, never being in the army, can boast and bluster about how they could beat the best military in the world, but i expect better from a vet. even if restricted to just small arms, t.t.p. and physical conditioning puts the army a. of the people.
edit on 5-3-2014 by stormson because: (no reason given)


Really?

if your statement was even remotely true, the russians would have been in and out of afghanistan in a couple of years, and we wouldn't even be there...instead, the russians battled untrained average people for a decade, bankrupted themselves doing it, and failed to achieve victory....we have been in there for OVER a decade, fighting a new generation of untrained average people, have bankrupted ourselves doing it, and have failed to achieve victory....when we were colonists, we beat the british army(the most powerful, most advanced army in the world, at the time), and they were FAR better armed, trained, and equipped than we were...sure we had a little help, but the majority of the work was done by us....

for you to believe that the citizens wouldn't stand a chance, is just shortsighted, and frankly, dumb...
edit on 5-3-2014 by Daedalus because: wouldn't you like to know





posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 12:51 PM
link   
This guy delivers.




posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by SWCCFAN
 


Excellent post and congratulations!

Thought to cheer you up a bit, didn't know if this has been posted on ATS yet... if not, its a good read:



Gaining Momentum: Now 44 Gun Companies Have Stopped Selling to Law Enforcement In Anti-2nd Amendment States

www.theblaze.com...



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 01:01 PM
link   

oblvion

Fromabove
When I read about this issue in Connecticut yesterday the thing that stood out was the phrase 4th generation warfare. When Waco happened, they just went in and killed everyone. And when the Republic of Texas group took on the issue, they got them too. And then there was the Montana group that was taken even though they held out for a long time.

The government efforts only succeed if they know you have guns and that you are at a location. They have teams all trained for civil warfare in that way. Under the new type of warfare, once they go after the guns, those with guns go after the lawmakers who made that possible. And that I suppose will be because then other would be tyrants will then fear reprisals and either not run for office or they will not continue to steal the freedoms of those they swore to serve.

I had always wondered how it would ever be that an active civil defiance could happen seeing as how the government has infiltrated every major militia group known. Under the terms of 4th generation warfare, every gun owning individual is a potential patriot militia member.

I always thought Red dawn would come to America, I just never thought the Reds would be the Feds. maybe it should be called "Fed Dawn" instead of Red dawn.

The Ukraine people took back their nation in a week.

I hope we never have civil war. It never goes well for anyone. One last thought on this. Even though there are 3 percenters out there, there are another 5 percent that will sympathize and aid their efforts. I suppose that's something they'll have to figure in as well.

Marshall law anyone?





edit on 5-3-2014 by Fromabove because: (no reason given)


I cant believe I was the first to give you a star!!!


Thatnkyou for the star. There are a lot of people here that don't like me because I am a Christian, and a smart one at that. I am conservative, and I don't care for Obama. But that's ok. They can't dance circles around me and that's my praise. Yet, I try to show respect to almost everyone I engage with on this site. I hope you do better than me. Again, thanks.





edit on 5-3-2014 by Fromabove because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Thecakeisalie
reply to post by SWCCFAN
 


If it's your right to own a firearm, then all the power to you.

But ask yourself, in what country would a person need a semi automatic high powered rifle to protect themselves against home invaders, thugs or other miscreants? wouldn't a sidearm suffice?

Then again I come from a place where I don't have to lock my doors at night, hell I could leave it unlocked while I was at work if i wanted to. I can see the right to protect ones self, but I don't see why people need an AR-15 to do so.

You have the right to bear whatever arms you wish, but when a lunatic has the same rights and decides to go on a shooting spree, well...

Personally I have my friend U.B at hand. He doesn't require loading, aiming, or maintenance, but he has the same stopping power.



Yes it is my right. Thank you.


You fail to understand why Americans have the right to keep and bear arms. It is to be able to protect ourselves from criminals and tyrants.

You mistakenly label the AR 15 as a High Power Rifle. It is not. It is actually a medium power rifle and it only has an effective range of 500 meters.

Now my 300 win mag is a high power rifle and it has a range of 1760 yards or 1 mile. It is bolt action and extremely accurate. No call to ban those is there...

An AR 15 is classified as a personal defensive weapon by Homeland Security. It not an Assault weapon. Those have a select fire mode.

In regards to lunatics going on shooting sprees... You would want to disarm the other 99.9999999% because of the 0.000000001%?

That is the most retarded argument ever.




posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 03:35 PM
link   

SWCCFAN
You mistakenly label the AR 15 as a High Power Rifle. It is not. It is actually a medium power rifle and it only has an effective range of 500 meters.

Now my 300 win mag is a high power rifle and it has a range of 1760 yards or 1 mile. It is bolt action and extremely accurate. No call to ban those is there...


I posted this on anther thread.

I would rather got shot with my Bushmaster .223 'assault weapon' then my Winchester .308 lever action rifle. The first may not kill me but the latter is going to leave a mark.

The 'scary' gun is much less scary than the hunting rifle.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


The people that are trying to ban "assault weapons" don't even know what one actually is. It's because they are black. I guess that makes them racist right





posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 03:58 PM
link   

SWCCFAN
The people that are trying to ban "assault weapons" don't even know what one actually is. It's because they are black. I guess that makes them racist right


Sad, the average person's only 'understanding' of firearms comes from watching the news after some shooting or a gun seizure where the weapons and ammunition are laid out on a table for maximum dramatic effect. They then throw out buzz phrases like, 'high capacity magazine', 'military style', 'semi-automatic', etc., etc., ad nauseum, ad infinitum.

The really funny thing is when I take my non-gun owning friends to the range for the first time and they overcome the initial trepidation the first thing they ask on the way home is, 'When can we do that again?'. I tell them, 'Anytime, just buy the ammo'.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 04:20 PM
link   

cavtrooper7
reply to post by Cuervo
 


You need a better divination spell. The Govt wouldn't have a chance,nor would the rest of the planet if THEY tried to take over the US( I have 6 years as an army scout for MY knowledge)
They are screwing up almost EVERYTHING they try due to EPIC incompetence,because the current regime and progressive push are based on SOCIAL POLITICS not logic. Come at us THAT way and not OUR way and it's over.Those who can do this think like me and would turn on them.
Hostages make lousy soldiers,in a nation chock FULL of expert marksmen( Ladies too) they would turn or die.The pres would have to lead from a bunker.


The problem is that 99% of the gun owners out there are nothing like you. It won't be a million highly trained army scouts against a few outnumbered soldiers. It would be the extent of the American war machine against a bunch of handguns, rifles, and shotguns.

I never said the government would win, I just said the rest of us would definitely lose.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 04:23 PM
link   

AugustusMasonicus

Cuervo
You will not win. If it escalates, you will lose. Fighting this with non-threats will be far more effective and lessen the chance of having to fight it for real someday. Because, if that day ever comes, it will be a civil war and you will lose. Everybody will. Because if that day comes, we will lose every other right in short order after the smoke clears.


I wonder where we would be today if certain persons in the 1770's had the same perspective. I suppose it all comes down to what the individual citizen is willing to sacrifice to ensure their inalienable and self evident rights.


Well for one we would probably have the UK's universal health care but that's beside the point.

The point is that, in the 1770's, we were on a colony with the main force living across an ocean who didn't have hardware any different than the colonist. They had a fighting chance. They weren't facing tanks, drones, and operatives with night vision.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 04:26 PM
link   

oblvion

Cuervo
reply to post by SWCCFAN
 


All I have is a cudgel and an athame so I think I'll be set once all the guns are gone.

Seriously, though... I'm not sure this kind of talk is a great idea. I mean, just saying that to myself seems wrong; like I shouldn't have to say that. But I honestly get the impression that this kind of talk is dangerous for all involved.

To those of you with guns and family, I urge you not to get all alpha when/if they come for your irons. I don't want Ruby Ridge to become an epidemic or a new slang term (i.e. "Did you hear about the Petersons? They just got Ruby Ridged!")

You will not win. If it escalates, you will lose. Fighting this with non-threats will be far more effective and lessen the chance of having to fight it for real someday. Because, if that day ever comes, it will be a civil war and you will lose. Everybody will. Because if that day comes, we will lose every other right in short order after the smoke clears. We should be making every effort to make sure that day never comes, not to fantasize about it. Threats are what they want. It's what will let them justify curfews and martial law.

Now, with the TSA, FBI, and CIA as my witnesses (I'm assuming), I have no guns in my home but if you barge your way in, there some nasty curses you'll unleash on yourself if you go through my altar room.


Yes because history supports your premise........wait how did that work out for the Jews? Or the Russians? Or the Cubans? Or the chinese?

Ok never mind you point is mute when viewed through the long view of history.

Thanks for playing though.


What do you think my premise is? Did you read my post and think I advocated turning in your guns? Because if you did, you misread it. I said that a war against our government would be a horrible horrible horrible war much more tragic than the Civil War. I said we should do what we can to avoid it and not fantasize about it.

By all means, if they institute martial law and start trying to literally take your guns, I'm not going to be booing you, that's for sure.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 04:45 PM
link   
I've been lurking on ATS for many years, and finally joined just to say how ridiculous these threads are getting. The sheer amount of paranoia on this website is unbelievable, and many of you definitely have some sort of psychological condition.

The sheer rage and indignation you post things like "Let them try and take my gun." like someone actually cares, is ridiculous. Comparing any of this to nazi death chambers is ridiculous and insulting.

And if you really think a few whackjobs with rifles would hold off the "Guv'mint" if they REALLY wanted to take your guns, then you're incredibly naive.

Just enjoy your life and stop thinking everyone is out to get you - you're not that important, nobody cares, "just another brick in the wall" as Floyd said. Have a beer, put a wildlife documentary on and stop living your life through paranoia - it'll be over before you know it.
edit on 5-3-2014 by Rezzij because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Cuervo
The point is that, in the 1770's, we were on a colony with the main force living across an ocean who didn't have hardware any different than the colonist. They had a fighting chance. They weren't facing tanks, drones, and operatives with night vision.


As was pointed out earlier the Colonists were facing the premier fighting force of the era who dominated both land and sea and they were defeated. Why? Guerilla warfare and the fact that the British were not fighting for themselves but for their government. Our overwhelming technological superiority, and it is overwhelming, is not nearly as effective against non-nation states and guerillas as has been proved out by all the military engagements we have been involved in since World War II.

Another thing to consider is that we no longer fight wars they way we used to, total annihilation of the enemy, both militarily and civilly, e.g. Germany and Japan. If we have rules of engagement in Afghanistan and Iraq where the enemy can hide in a Mosque and we are reluctant to drop a Joint Directed weapon on them then how would that work on United States citizens?

Not that I want to see armed insurrection but if that outcome were to come to fruition I believe that the 'government' would be on the losing end. There are more ex-military then military and even the active duty would question the situation whereas the 'rebels' would be engaging without compunction. The side with nothing to lose, as they feel it has already been taken, will fight more ferociously.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Rezzij
And if you really think a few whackjobs with rifles would hold off the "Guv'mint" if they REALLY wanted to take your guns, then you're incredibly naive.


A few 'whackjobs with rifles' did more than hold off the government in the 1770-80's, they won. Next time you happen to be in a town square take a look at some of the memorials, they were called 'patriots'.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


Population then vs now, technology and communication then vs now, and about a thousand other reasons dictated by reason, logic, and rational thinking render your point irrelevant.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Rezzij
Population then vs now, technology and communication then vs now, and about a thousand other reasons dictated by reason, logic, and rational thinking render your point irrelevant.


Do you really think technology provides any great advantage when dealing with a civilian population?

How has our overwhelming technology worked in Afghanistan and Iraq?

You make it sound like it will be a pitched battle when it would be nothing of the sort. How do you effectively defend against insurrectionists dressed as civilians? Better still, dressed as military. You see how many one disguised Afghani/Iraqi can kill with a weapon when he is the 'wolf in sheep's clothing'? How long does this transpire on American soil before the media and non-engaged population become disgusted and press the government to cease actions?

Think about real world situations that have already taken place before you comment as this is what renders yours irrelevant.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 04:57 PM
link   

AugustusMasonicus

Cuervo
The point is that, in the 1770's, we were on a colony with the main force living across an ocean who didn't have hardware any different than the colonist. They had a fighting chance. They weren't facing tanks, drones, and operatives with night vision.


As was pointed out earlier the Colonists were facing the premier fighting force of the era who dominated both land and sea and they were defeated. Why? Guerilla warfare and the fact that the British were not fighting for themselves but for their government. Our overwhelming technological superiority, and it is overwhelming, is not nearly as effective against non-nation states and guerillas as has been proved out by all the military engagements we have been involved in since World War II.

Another thing to consider is that we no longer fight wars they way we used to, total annihilation of the enemy, both militarily and civilly, e.g. Germany and Japan. If we have rules of engagement in Afghanistan and Iraq where the enemy can hide in a Mosque and we are reluctant to drop a Joint Directed weapon on them then how would that work on United States citizens?

Not that I want to see armed insurrection but if that outcome were to come to fruition I believe that the 'government' would be on the losing end. There are more ex-military then military and even the active duty would question the situation whereas the 'rebels' would be engaging without compunction. The side with nothing to lose, as they feel it has already been taken, will fight more ferociously.


The posts I've read since I posted that has persuaded me a bit, especially when I'm reminded of Vietnam. I still don't believe there would be even a slight chance of "winning" but I do believe it could be a stalemate in which (like I said before) everybody loses. It would be brutal and the enemy would have the most sophisticated intelligence on the planet. And lets pretend we have the best case scenario and half the military defects to help the people, the people miraculously get organized by vets, and they achieve some stunning victories. What then? It would still be a horrible blood bath with tons of innocent Americans dying. Children and families.

Also, as I've said, if it came to that, I wouldn't discourage nor berate those that fought back. I would even help an American "revolutionary" if he came to my home seeking aid (I'd just say I was "scurred" if the government asks) and I'd even hope they win but I'm not going to be putting myself to sleep with Red Dawn fantasies roaming around my brain with a smile on my face. Because there is no good outcome of that. I'm just saying that it's scary to hear people actually speak like they are looking forward to it. Almost as if it's a game.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Cuervo

cavtrooper7
reply to post by Cuervo
 


You need a better divination spell. The Govt wouldn't have a chance,nor would the rest of the planet if THEY tried to take over the US( I have 6 years as an army scout for MY knowledge)
They are screwing up almost EVERYTHING they try due to EPIC incompetence,because the current regime and progressive push are based on SOCIAL POLITICS not logic. Come at us THAT way and not OUR way and it's over.Those who can do this think like me and would turn on them.
Hostages make lousy soldiers,in a nation chock FULL of expert marksmen( Ladies too) they would turn or die.The pres would have to lead from a bunker.


The problem is that 99% of the gun owners out there are nothing like you. It won't be a million highly trained army scouts against a few outnumbered soldiers. It would be the extent of the American war machine against a bunch of handguns, rifles, and shotguns.

I never said the government would win, I just said the rest of us would definitely lose.


You think it would be the extent of the war machine?

No, the military would divide. They would lose a portion of their forces. Some would turn and others just wouldn't be able to fight for either side. The question is how many would turn ... It also depends on how much sympathy the rebels get from the remaining civilian populace. During the revolution, only a small percentage actually fought, but a much larger one supported them as they could and that was key.

Also, you would be looking at a situation where whole states would secede.

And yes, you are entirely right that this would be an ugly, ugly situation. This is quite possibly why no one has made a move yet, but they keep pushing, don't they? I guess they're just trusting that we don't have lines that we won't let them cross.

The thing that would kill us, any rebellion, would be when the one side invites in China and Russia to "help" put down the unrest. We might be able to win against ourselves, but we can't fight the whole world order.
edit on 5-3-2014 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Cuervo
The posts I've read since I posted that has persuaded me a bit, especially when I'm reminded of Vietnam. I still don't believe there would be even a slight chance of "winning" but I do believe it could be a stalemate in which (like I said before) everybody loses. It would be brutal and the enemy would have the most sophisticated intelligence on the planet. And lets pretend we have the best case scenario and half the military defects to help the people, the people miraculously get organized by vets, and they achieve some stunning victories. What then? It would still be a horrible blood bath with tons of innocent Americans dying. Children and families.

Also, as I've said, if it came to that, I wouldn't discourage nor berate those that fought back. I would even help an American "revolutionary" if he came to my home seeking aid (I'd just say I was "scurred" if the government asks) and I'd even hope they win but I'm not going to be putting myself to sleep with Red Dawn fantasies roaming around my brain with a smile on my face. Because there is no good outcome of that. I'm just saying that it's scary to hear people actually speak like they are looking forward to it. Almost as if it's a game.


I completely understand where you are coming from. Fantasies about engaging any United States citizen in armed combat, civilian or military, is the furthest thing from my mind and it would be a blood bath. But I think I can state with some accuracy that by all accounts that I read the majority of the Colonial population had not even dreamed of raising arms against Britain but injustice followed injustice and the tactics they employed were effective to thwart a standing army, albeit with great loss. It would be the same situation all over again.



posted on Mar, 5 2014 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Rezzij
I've been lurking on ATS for many years, and finally joined just to say how ridiculous these threads are getting. The sheer amount of paranoia on this website is unbelievable, and many of you definitely have some sort of psychological condition.

The sheer rage and indignation you post things like "Let them try and take my gun." like someone actually cares, is ridiculous. Comparing any of this to nazi death chambers is ridiculous and insulting.

And if you really think a few whackjobs with rifles would hold off the "Guv'mint" if they REALLY wanted to take your guns, then you're incredibly naive.

Just enjoy your life and stop thinking everyone is out to get you - you're not that important, nobody cares, "just another brick in the wall" as Floyd said. Have a beer, put a wildlife documentary on and stop living your life through paranoia - it'll be over before you know it.
edit on 5-3-2014 by Rezzij because: (no reason given)


I could say, "Welcome to ATS!", but I wouldn't mean it.

Many here know I'm a liberal individual, particularly on social issues.
I cannot, however, abide a bully and that's what anti-second amendment
gun grabbers are,
whether they do their dirty work incrementally or not.

I don't currently own a gun and am a very peaceable person. But, I will by God, stand by my
countrymen against tyranny and anyone who won't is a true "whackjob".




top topics



 
97
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join