Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

(Hypothetical) Government Tyrrany - How does having an AR help?

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:26 PM
link   
Lately, when popping my head into some of the gun-control, pro-gun threads, I've noticed a trend among people who claim to own "semi-automatic" "Assault Rifles". I use those terms in quotes because I think they are pretty over-hyped by the media. I think it's somewhat hard to classify one rifle as an Assault Rifle over the other, and pretty much every gun besides bolt-action rifles, and pump shotguns can be classified as "semi-automatic". Now, with that being said, I'll continue on to my point. The trend I've noticed is that a lot of the people who own one of these rifles claim that they own it, just in case there was a "Government Takeover" with martial law, or the use of concentration camps or some such.

So, what I'd ultimately like to ask, is:

1) Why do you own an AR rifle if you do?

and

2) If it's because you fear that you may need it to rebel against the government, how do you think having an AR might help you when facing the largest mechanized military in the World? Is it useful in defending against Tanks, Planes, and Drones?

I find the argument that people own some of the weapons they do, just in case the government tries to take over, to be a pretty ignorant argument. That being said, if people truly believe they own these weapons to defend against a tyrannical government, why aren't they lobbying for the legal purchase/use of Explosives, and Rocket Launchers, AA guns, and everything else they would need to -actually- defend themselves against our military?

PS: I'm not against people owning weapons that the media call "Assault Rifles", so long as it is done in a responsible, transparent, and safe way. It shouldn't be as easy as it is to buy a weapon of this caliber. (Aka Walmart, bought at gun shows without a background check, etc).




posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ElijahWan
 


Recent history proves that guerilla warfare is the achilles heal of these massive armies. An AR is very effective in such situations.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by ElijahWan
 


Try Afghanistan X 20... That's all I should have to say.. You don't run up to tanks and open fire.. They don't know which of us are which.. We hide our guns.. Ambush...

Remember how we fought the british?? Hide all over and snipe..

We have better training than any other civiliians besides maybe Israel, but come on, who can take us on?

Are they going to blow up all the cities to get to us? Where are they going to hide? Get it?



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by ElijahWan
 



2) If it's because you fear that you may need it to rebel against the government, how do you think having an AR might help you when facing the largest mechanized military in the World? Is it useful in defending against Tanks, Planes, and Drones?

I find the argument that people own some of the weapons they do, just in case the government tries to take over, to be a pretty ignorant argument.


You do realize that those in the military whom have those so called superior weapons, DO have the ability to turn them against the government, when they realize they are being ordered to kill their own?????

So how are those whom use their freedom to fight against a tyrannical government "ignorant"??? Your words, not mine!!!



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by ElijahWan
 


Recent history proves that guerilla warfare is the achilles heal of these massive armies. An AR is very effective in such situations.


If UK military forces had wanted to put an end to the Irish terrorist threat and didn't care a jot about the effect of their actions on the watching world, they'd have made those terrorists wish they'd never even dreamed of picking up a firearm, or messed around with explosives. A couple of spec ops teams of 5 could probably take out a high command in a weekend, if rushed for results..



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:37 PM
link   
Its the weapon that they use so thats how we know its the best.

But i think fire is one of the best weapons. You may not be able to pierce their bullet proof vests, but a large Molotov cocktail launched from a distance by a large rail launcher powered by silicone bands (kinda like a large crossbow/slingshot) would repel them.
everyone is afraid of fire.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dustytoad
reply to post by ElijahWan
 


Try Afghanistan X 20... That's all I should have to say.. You don't run up to tanks and open fire.. They don't know which of us are which.. We hide our guns.. Ambush...

Remember how we fought the british?? Hide all over and snipe..


Seems like you learned a lot from the genuine natives of your fine continent.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


Are you saying a population of 300,000,000 people and about as many weapons and an entire country as a target are comparable to the IRA? and "high command?" We won't have a commander... Silly..
edit on 1/12/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanAstikov

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by ElijahWan
 


Recent history proves that guerilla warfare is the achilles heal of these massive armies. An AR is very effective in such situations.


If UK military forces had wanted to put an end to the Irish terrorist threat and didn't care a jot about the effect of their actions on the watching world, they'd have made those terrorists wish they'd never even dreamed of picking up a firearm, or messed around with explosives. A couple of spec ops teams of 5 could probably take out a high command in a weekend, if rushed for results..



Really? How have these huge armies fared in Iraq? Afghanistan? Vietnam? How did the Brits fair against asymmetrical tactics used by the very under-armed Americans?

Guerrilla warfare can not be truly defeated unless you take out the entire population, and good luck on that.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dustytoad
reply to post by ElijahWan
 


Try Afghanistan X 20... That's all I should have to say.. You don't run up to tanks and open fire.. They don't know which of us are which.. We hide our guns.. Ambush...

Remember how we fought the british?? Hide all over and snipe..

We have better training than any other civiliians besides maybe Israel, but come on, who can take us on?

Are they going to blow up all the cities to get to us? Where are they going to hide? Get it?


Hypothetically though, what if they declare. "Too many guns, we're confiscating them, martial law is declared" and start rolling tanks down our neighborhood streets. "We know you are a registered gun owner, You own "insert gun", "insert gun". and "insert gun", please throw them out of your front door onto your lawn, or we will put a tank shell through your living room". In that situation, how does an AR help you? I agree they are useful when attacking a human target, but I can't think that if the government -actually- instituted tyranny, that they'd do so using a standing army. If Hitler had access to drones, jets, and some of the other advanced weaponry the US possesses now, I can't imagine he'd of had much trouble achieving his 1000 year rule.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:41 PM
link   


How many times must this question be answered??

A HISTORY BOOK is your friend. Or you can search through the HUNDREDS of replies to this question ALREADY posted here on this website.

Geez, are there folks here whom actually still dont know this one yet? REALLY???


edit on 12-1-2013 by ResistTreason because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by ElijahWan
 


Intel buddy.. Tanks don't just appear out of nowhere..
edit on 1/12/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ElijahWan
 


In that specific situation, an AR doesnt help a lot. But that wouldnt be the whole fight. There is no possible way to get every gun off of the street. Period. The minute a tank rolls into ANY neighborhood in america, it is on. People arent going to wait for them to knock on the door. By that point, it will have already started.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ElijahWan
 


Thats when you run, with your ar... then strategically attact at weak points..



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanAstikov


Seems like you learned a lot from the genuine natives of your fine continent.


I'm almost one quarter cherokee... But I learned this from researching war.. And My Army training..
edit on 1/12/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:44 PM
link   
how how is it that they can send in a navy seal or special ops team of like 6 people and they can take out hundreds of people?

while the gov is riding around in big loud tanks and flying around in planes I will be hiding with my 5-10 buddies with our ar-15s ready to shoot as soon as we see someone poke their head out of that tank... also fyi those tanks and planes wont by flying very long if a civic war started because the gov does not have enough fuel reserves to go long enough to fight its own people... When they can't get fuel from one area to another those tanks arent going to e doing them much good.

Another thing is what they call home field advantage.

Also if the gov started killing its own people whether someone has a gun or not americans will stand up in any way that they can.

There is a very fine line that we live on I was at costco today getting some bulk groceries and I was sitting there eating a piece of pizza afterwards looking at easily 200 people at the checkout. I thought to myself, if everyone in this store filled up their carts and just walked out there is nothing that anyone could do about it, what are they going to do arrest all 200 people? What keeps people from just doing that?

We follow a code of rules, if the GOV does not follow that same code of rules why should we? just like when raising kids you cant do drugs and then tell your kid hey dont do drugs its bad.. well why do you do it dad? double standards and hypocrisy dont work more and more people are waking up and seeing what is really happening and are getting fed up with it.

Things will change one way or another.. The revolution they said that same thing, we are out manned and out gunned, history time and time again has shown us its not about who has more men and more guns or who has the better weapons.

No one will ever take anything from me nor will I allow them to enslave me. If it comes to it I would rather die a free man fighting for my freedom then do die on my knees in chains. Do I want to fight? No, will I fight? YES

If the Gov of the USA decides to declare war against its people you will see a MASSIVE uprising with support from many other countries do you know what a few hundred of the top hackers in the world could cripple the US government in hours if they had a good reason to do so. You can't run the military now days without computer, radar, internet.

There are only so many of them and VERY many of us, once normal people cant get food and things that they need or cant work they will stand up and fight.

This country needs an awakening, it needs big change towards everyone leading self sustaining life, every town and city should be providing its own food with a 0 negative environment footprint, it can easily be done, everyone could eat for free and there is no reason not to.

oh and I jsut read the thing about if hitler had advanced weapons ect.. he did he had the most advanced weapons that were way more hardcore compared to the US at that time which is why we captured all of his scientist and forgave their warcrimes in exchange for their knowledge.. So yah even with his massive amounts of better weapons he did not ultimately win the battle although he was the more superior player in the game.
edit on 12-1-2013 by dc4lifeskater because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:45 PM
link   
Many rebellions only start out with small fire fights but as the rebels begin to organize and fight back in larger numbers, many other types of weapons become available. you also have to take into account many public officials, law enforcement and military waking up to what is going on and helping with more powerful weapons.

Look at Vietnam...we lost that war, for one of many reasons, because of the organization and sheer numbers of guerilla fighters. They didnt have tanks and huge cannons or fighter jets, they did have mortars and grenades/rpgs, but they used traditional means like booby traps, suicide bombings etc. A molotov cocktail is pretty darn effective against the tank once you get close enough. Even improvised car bombs. There is all kinds of things that can be done

The majority of any type of domestic take over would consist primarily of ground troops, to mobilize and subdue the masses before a an organized retaliation can take place....if we are weaponless that will be the beginning of the end but if we are armed we have a better chance of fighting and making it harder for them to subdue us.

Guerrilla warfar



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by ElijahWan
 



2) If it's because you fear that you may need it to rebel against the government, how do you think having an AR might help you when facing the largest mechanized military in the World? Is it useful in defending against Tanks, Planes, and Drones?

I find the argument that people own some of the weapons they do, just in case the government tries to take over, to be a pretty ignorant argument.


You do realize that those in the military whom have those so called superior weapons, DO have the ability to turn them against the government, when they realize they are being ordered to kill their own?????

So how are those whom use their freedom to fight against a tyrannical government "ignorant"??? Your words, not mine!!!


Actually what I said was, I think the argument that people own these weapons in case of Government tyranny is an ignorant argument. As a poster above mentioned. Guerilla warfare is useful to a point, but with most of our military being mechanized, it's really not -that- much more beneficial to have an AR over a Bolt-action rifle.

And yes, I know that many in the military could rebel against the government too and use their own weapons against them. This is a hypothetical situation in which a majority of the military is following their orders, and tanks, drones, and planes are being deployed in country. If this were the situation, I still don't see how having an AR over a bolt-action rifle is more beneficial.

Which brings me back to my second point. Why aren't those who own their guns "in case of tyranny" advocating for the legal use of Rocket Launchers, C4, Grenades, and every other military weapon that the average US citizen can't get their hands on?



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:46 PM
link   
You put it like:

"oh it's the army vs civilians. Obviously civilians will get owned".

You have to remember, before people join the army, what are they? Civilians.

It wouldn't be as clean cut of a fight as you think.



posted on Jan, 12 2013 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dustytoad
reply to post by IvanAstikov
 


Are you saying a population of 300,000,000 people and about as many weapons and an entire country as a target are comparable to the IRA? and "high command?" We won't have a commander... Silly..
edit on 1/12/2013 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)


You think you have 300 million supporters? Even if you did, I'd be amazed if 1% of the non-miltary experienced citizens proved to be capable of cutting the mustard when the shtf





new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join