If there are 300 million people in the US and for arguments sake lets say only 25% of the population felt the need to stand up against the government, that would be 75 million armed citizens in the streets. How many police officers and foreign military would it take to put down that many armed people?

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by Skewed

---

You should start a thread on this. It could be quite an interesting topic in and of itself. But I don't want to push the mods patience too much by pursuing it in this thread.

ETA: Oh what the hell, surely it's not such a stretch in a thread like this.

If there are 300 million people in the US and for arguments sake lets say only 25% of the population felt the need to stand up against the government, that would be 75 million armed citizens in the streets. How many police officers and foreign military would it take to put down that many armed people?

I see your point. But your estimate of 25% to me is exceptionally generous. I'm thinking more along the lines of 1-2% max. Which is by no means a small number, but still no match for a mix of foreign troops and our own troops and police with far superior weaponry.

I hope though, it never comes to that, and a peaceful route can be chosen instead.

edit on 7/13/2011 by Klassified because: Changed my mind.

The Three Percent in 1775.

During the American Revolution, the active forces in the field against the King's tyranny never amounted to more than 3% of the colonists. They were in turn actively supported by perhaps 10% of the population. In addition to these revolutionaries were perhaps another 20% who favored their cause but did little or nothing to support it. Another one-third of the population sided with the King (by the end of the war there were actually more Americans fighting FOR the King than there were in the field against him) and the final third took no side, blew with the wind and took what came.

Three Percenters today do not claim that we represent 3% of the American people, although we might. That theory has not yet been tested. We DO claim that we represent at least 3% of American gun owners, which is still a healthy number somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 million people. History, for good or ill, is made by determined minorities. We are one such minority. So too are the current enemies of the Founders' Republic. What remains, then, is the test of will and skill to determine who shall shape the future of our nation.

The Three Percent today are gun owners who will not disarm, will not compromise and will no longer back up at the passage of the next gun control act. Three Percenters say quite explicitly that we will not obey any further circumscription of our traditional liberties and will defend ourselves if attacked. We intend to maintain our God-given natural rights to liberty and property, and that means most especially the right to keep and bear arms. Thus, we are committed to the restoration of the Founders' Republic, and are willing to fight, die and, if forced by any would-be oppressor, to kill in the defense of ourselves and the Constitution that we all took an oath to uphold against enemies foreign and domestic.

We are the people that the collectivists who now control the government should leave alone if they wish to continue unfettered oxygen consumption. We are the Three Percent. Attempt to further oppress us at your peril.

To put it bluntly, leave us the hell alone.

Or, if you feel froggy, go ahead AND WATCH WHAT HAPPENS.

Here is what was really decided...they are not under marshal law.....

Color of Law Abuses - FBI

U.S. law enforcement officers and other officials like judges, prosecutors, and security guards have been given tremendous power by local, state, and federal government agencies—authority they must have to enforce the law and ensure justice in our country. These powers include the authority to detain and arrest suspects, to search and seize property, to bring criminal charges, to make rulings in court, and to use deadly force in certain situations.

Preventing abuse of this authority, however, is equally necessary to the health of our nation’s democracy. That’s why it’s a federal crime for anyone acting under “color of law” willfully to deprive or conspire to deprive a person of a right protected by the Constitution or U.S. law. “Color of law” simply means that the person is using authority given to him or her by a local, state, or federal government agency.

The FBI is the lead federal agency for investigating color of law abuses, which include acts carried out by government officials operating both within and beyond the limits of their lawful authority. Off-duty conduct may be covered if the perpetrator asserted his or her official status in some way.

During 2009, the FBI investigated 385 color of law cases.....

Originally posted by caladonea
Here is what was really decided...they are not under marshal law.

paloverdevalleytimes.com...

Under the rules for Call to the Public that are published with every council agenda, the mayor is the only person authorized to inform a speaker that he or she is out of line and ask for that person to be removed.

Foster told the Pioneer Gilbert had stopped at his home and offered to take him to Town Hall. Foster declined and said he would drive himself. He said that, when he arrived, he found a council meeting was taking place.
He said he declined to enter the building because he recognized this was an illegal meeting. After that, he said the front doors were locked. Taft said the door was locked on advice from Brannan. Foster said the meeting was not announced or posted.
He added that, under state law, only the mayor can declare a state of emergency.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by Klassified

---

Im listening to Alex right now. How can the Police arrest the mayor without probable cause? Someone needs to call in the state militia and arrest the police