For all you anti-gun people that believe that an armed populace of over 100 million people cannot compete with a well traianed well equipped high technology armed fighting force, please answer how they might counteract the following hypothetical situation.

A man puts together a five man group of skilled hunters and or ex combat veterans. they have only the legally allowed firearms currently available and whatever they can scrounge from the local hardware store. They have decided to assasinate local low key federal agents from organizations like the TSA or DHS or any other similar group. After plotting said assasinations they begin to follow through with their plans.

By doing this they instantly remove the threat of any large scale military retaliation for two reasons.
1. They cannot endanger the civilian populace that might support the government.
2. they cannot find the five man terrorist group, because after each operation they split up, go home, and go back to their day job until the next operation.

They have instilled fear into the the low level beaurocracy by taking out random agents. This immediately slows down the organization and willingness of these agents to go into work and perform their appointed duties. This slows down the government. A slower government cannot react fast enough to compensate for these random five man groups that start to pop up all over the country.

As these five man groups start to increase and the beaurocracy starts to decrease you now have a government trying to control a military that cannot react fast enough out of hardened bunkers that cannot be penetrated. As the military cannot deploy larger scale weapons on the civilian populace the military itself starts to become a target.

How do you take out a military instalation from an outnumbered 40 to 1 group?
You remove the supply chain. An ancient tactic used on any large groug but even more possible by the shere number of attackers.

You shut off all sup[lies in and out of the military bases. Control the food and fuel and you now control the military.
The local and federal agents are too scared to go out and try to find these terrorists and know that they are now outnumbered by 40-1 with a growing animosity of the populace. The Government cannot turn to the people for help and the terrorists or freedom fighters have the sfull support of this same populace.

how would you stop this hypothetical terrorist/freedom movement if you were the government?

Now maybe you might understand how the average Joe Blow and a few simply armed accomplices can lead to the downfall of a major military battle and why the government is so hell bent on removing firearms from the populace.

As I said this is all hypothetical but I will willing engage and serious debate. Flamers need not apply.

respectfully

reluctantpawn

Most likely the .gov would instill martial law, and anyone caught out would be detained, searched and have all known associates investigated as well. However in a large city such as NY with lots of underground tunnels it would be much more successful. In a large city its much easier to evade detection while traveling by using sewer, subway and other access tunnels. The other option for a small insurgency like you describe would be to use homemade explosives on RC vehicles to deliver them to the target(s). But using your scenario martial law would be the .govs answer to containment, detainment and investigation. This would indicate anyone out after curfew or against orders as an enemy combatant and a target.

Double tap.

The Identity of domestic terrorist group would be ascertained eventually and they fed would follow through with arrests. Simple.

You cannot operate on a urbanized environment these days without being noticed, recorded or without leaving a trace. Simple investigation would lead to the capture of these people, especially if they limited their area of attack to particular geographic area.

My support being the incident were the father/son shooters were firing from a concealed compartment in the trunk of their car. Pretty stealthy, but they were eventually witnessed and caught.

What you just theorized belongs in the world of make believe. No one group would ever get away with anything..because ordinary citizens would notice and report which would in turn begin an investigation.

So yeah nothing like that would ever occur..maybe might work for one or two hits...but sooner or later someone will let the cat out of the bag.

Taking supplies for an entire military compound would definitely draw unwanted attention. Other military bases would help out their comrades..they would also find out what is going on which would totally screw these five guys plans..

Wow you really did not understand the thread. It would not be one group but hundreds of groups each operating independently and without guidance. There are 100 million firearms owners and 1/2million in the armed forces. That makes about 200 to 1 odds.

As far as martial law unconcerned it only opens the doors wider. It allows checkpoints to be eliminated mordant efficiently. A large group simply cannot stand in a constant state of readiness.

As the peoples rights are restricted the government is seen as a bigger and bigger bully and the snowball effect will come into play. More people will Side against the government.

Of course it can't happen with one group but with 200 to 1 odds it will defeat any organized military. When push comes to shove and the people have had enough , yes they can overpower the military, no matter how well armed they are.

Respectfully

Reluctantpawn