If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fairbanks Daily Newsminer)   The reality of how the modern US will treat your well-armed militia and any fantasies of an uprising   (newsminer.com) divider line 424
    More: Obvious, Fairbanks, foreign exchange reserves, magic, Alaska State Troopers, rebellions, classical conditions, treating, psychological tests  
•       •       •

25791 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Jan 2013 at 11:03 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



424 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-09 03:02:44 PM

Ennuipoet: I've been trying to explain this to various retarded conservative friends over the past few months.  They seem to labor under the delusion the Army would never attack it's citizens and I have to explain again that "The Army" doesn't have to do shiat, just a couple of guys in a trailer with link to the Predators.


Leaving aside the failure drones to pacify Afghanistan, it's not the willingness of the army to attack terrorists which is in doubt, but the willingness of the army to inflict huge civilian casualties while doing so. The British army failed in Northern Ireland because it wasn't - thank goodness - prepared to engage in the mass slaughter which would have been required to deal with the terrorists.
 
2013-01-09 03:04:10 PM

pedrop357: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Simple honesty?

Some of you eventually get around to it(when pressed) in Fark threads but at the water cooler or when local news shows up to cover Gun Appreciation Day you're all, "Hunting! Defense! Sport!" then something vague about the Constitution.

It's the Spring Surpise of the debate.

In that case, will you admit that the police need their firearms to shoot citizens?


Of course.
 
2013-01-09 03:04:48 PM
Why do people think that we lost militarily in Afghanistan?

Stop thinking that, it's not true. Their lack of a functioning governement has nothing to do with how Western forces acted/operated there, and has everything to do with internal culture/politics.
 
2013-01-09 03:07:52 PM

vpb: There is a reason you don't hear about the Taliban winning any battles.


Which is that guerilla armies of resistance do not, by and large, fight battles. That's the big boys' game. The less formal organisations plants IEDs, carry out assassinations, burn down villages, that sort of thing. Expecting them to play by formal rules is like expecting anyone who attacks the UK to take a break for tea every afternoon (See: Asterix and the Britains)
 
2013-01-09 03:13:21 PM

Evil Twin Skippy: Afghanistan had a steady supply of arms and money from Bin Laden and his network the US.


Unrewrote that for you.
 
2013-01-09 03:14:36 PM
Just because these nut jobs call themselves a militia does not make them one, else I really would be The Supreme Ruler of the Known Universe.
 
2013-01-09 03:16:00 PM

Catsaregreen: Our Founding Fathers are rolling over in their graves.


Considering that they are more than likely just dust would they not be blowing over in their graves?
 
2013-01-09 03:17:44 PM

Madbassist1: The Afganis kicked our asses...and before us, the Soviets. Thats quite a farking accomplishment, if you ask me.


and well before that, the might of the British Empire. Kicking foreign invaders' sorry arses is the national sport in Afghanistan. If they ever find themselves short of foreign invaders, they fight themselves just to keep in practice.
 
2013-01-09 03:22:59 PM

Secret Master of All Flatulence: All of y'all are making one bad assumption: That it'll be the US military enforcing said law. That ain't the case....it'll most likely be the local cops. How many dead cops is this administration willing to spend?


Police would pose no resistance whatsoever to an organized uprising. They'd be too busy telephoning their union reps and filling out forms for extra "hazardous duty" pay.

The US government is a paper tiger. It'd fold inside of 2 weeks. All that would be left of the USA would be a few strips of Rust Belt territory and a quarter of what was once called "Washington, D.C."
 
2013-01-09 03:24:12 PM

Artisan Sandwich: Why do people think that we lost militarily in Afghanistan?


How about "because your troops keep getting killed there, your enemy controls much of the country and the unscrupulous corrupt bastard you are maintaining in some simulacrum of tenuous power has the life expectancy of a mayfly when you leave?" Will that do for a start?
 
2013-01-09 03:31:16 PM

Phinn: Secret Master of All Flatulence: All of y'all are making one bad assumption: That it'll be the US military enforcing said law. That ain't the case....it'll most likely be the local cops. How many dead cops is this administration willing to spend?

Police would pose no resistance whatsoever to an organized uprising. They'd be too busy telephoning their union reps and filling out forms for extra "hazardous duty" pay.

The US government is a paper tiger. It'd fold inside of 2 weeks. All that would be left of the USA would be a few strips of Rust Belt territory and a quarter of what was once called "Washington, D.C."


At least where I live, police wouldn't be a problem at all. There's maybe a dozen or more and they can all be easily swayed to come to a the revolt with a few donuts. Seriously... I think we have the dumbest farking law enforcement in the U.S.

So are my farking neighbors. My fantasy, in case of an uprising would be to immediately take out the men, take all their food goods and enslave their wives and daughters. At least one of the wives is pretty hot, the daughters... well I'd have to wait a few years before entering them in my breeding program to start a new world order. I don't want to be accused of diddling underage girls.
 
2013-01-09 03:31:23 PM
Yeah, guerrilla warfare never works.
 
2013-01-09 03:39:52 PM

orbister: Artisan Sandwich: Why do people think that we lost militarily in Afghanistan?

How about "because your troops keep getting killed there, your enemy controls much of the country and the unscrupulous corrupt bastard you are maintaining in some simulacrum of tenuous power has the life expectancy of a mayfly when you leave?" Will that do for a start?


Did you read what I wrote?
 
2013-01-09 03:43:02 PM

PacManDreaming: Or, if they just wanted to be dicks, they'd roll the armor out. I'd imagine the first Rambo-wannabe that found out his high-powered .22 AR-15 didn't worked very well against an IFV would crap his intestines out.


They would be rolling those tanks over a lot of houses belonging to people who had no connection to the militia you were after. They can get away with that in Afghanistan or Iraq, but it would lead to trouble in the US.
 
2013-01-09 03:48:02 PM

doglover: vpb: I don't know how they could "instigate" someone into organizing a terrorist organization.

FBI agents are really easy to spot.

Organize a group like anarchists. Have a big roundtable once you get a lot of membership. The bigger guy who says "Let's blow up (whatever)! I can get a bomb!" is the Fed. Pretty easy.


I think I read an article that basically said this. They were talking about a group that was protesting some law, and a Fed came in and was being an asshole.

I have to say that, if I were in that sort of group and had any authority whatsoever, my response to that would be to give them a framed award for being Most Obvious Fed Ever, give an official warning about following nonviolence rules, and then go on with the meeting like nothing had happened.
 
2013-01-09 03:57:41 PM

tallen702: I ♥ all of the references to the military might of the US here at home... you know... where very few soldiers are armed and those that are on armed guard duty typically only have a few live rounds in their magazine. It takes us months to outfit soldiers and deploy them to the two wars we are currently fighting, you know, those wars where quite a bit of our materiel is concentrated.

The weapons we DO have on our shores are kept in armories on bases. Bases are fairly open. The word "Fort" doesn't mean walls, moats, barbed wire, etc. anymore. It simply means that the DoD owns the land and the buildings there. If the shiat were to really actually hit the fan, do you honestly think that the US based forces could react in time to prevent determined armed militias from entering an un-guarded fort, breaking into the armory, and absconding with shoulder-fired guided missiles and anti-tank weapons? Then, when you've got enough of a following, what's to prevent you from taking tanks and other heavy weapons?

An actual armed uprising in the US wouldn't be some fudds with squirrel shooters, it'd be a well-armed blood bath for all involved regardless of the US military's level of technology. Syrian rebels didn't start out with full-auto weapons for all, but once they took a few armories, they started making great strides. Same went for the Libyans and most of the Serb-Croat war.

To bury your head in the sand and say "but predator drones!" is to fail at strategy by leaps and bounds.


Help me understand again...Why would these people be taking up arms against the government?

Someone really needs to help me understand what's happened to the US government that has made it the enemy of democracy.
 
2013-01-09 03:58:40 PM
GORDON: Yeah, guerrilla warfare never works.

I think the reason for all the attention is because they do work.

The one thing a leader fears, more than losing an election or not getting his bribe on time, is the idea of his subjects going all "Cordis Die" on him. No one wants to be the man on top when the proletariat storm the gates, intent on combining their bayonet collection with a new found fetish for sodomizing wealthy old men.

Hence the detailed infiltration and lengthy prison sentence.
Its not that this guy had a chance in hell of starting anything, but the state is certainly afraid of people getting ideas.
 
2013-01-09 04:02:43 PM
The only Americans in the past century and a half to take up arms and confront Govt were the Black Panthers.

The Right in this country does not have the balls to take on the Govt, though they could. Authority worshippers don't tend to revolt, although they do show up as volunteers to help load the trains. Not gonna happen, you can't go to war on a hoverround and as soon as it started, they would shut down Fox News and then they wouldn't know what to think anymore and they would go home.
 
2013-01-09 04:04:14 PM

pedrop357: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Simple honesty?

Some of you eventually get around to it(when pressed) in Fark threads but at the water cooler or when local news shows up to cover Gun Appreciation Day you're all, "Hunting! Defense! Sport!" then something vague about the Constitution.

It's the Spring Surpise of the debate.

In that case, will you admit that the police need their firearms to shoot citizens?


Specifically, scary minorities
 
2013-01-09 04:07:52 PM

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Profedius: Having thought on the matter quite a bit and discussions with ex high ranking service member friends the scenario with the best chance of success in at least starting a revolution is where a protest movement that is somewhat non-violent gains enough members then becomes organized and switches to a violent agenda on focused targets. In order to maintain any long term resistance several military installations would need to be targeted in the opening actions focusing primarily on Air Force targets since their bases would have a lower level of armed resistance.

Your friends Army or Navy?


Both and the Air Force don't have any friends in the Marines. Nothing against the Air Force it is just an area the civilians can not currently compete with any real success once the assets are airborne, however on the ground they are combat ineffective and lightly guarded. The Navy's response is limited to long range missiles and carrier based aircraft which are not as numerous nor as easily reachable as the Air Force's. One would also have the advantage of time since naval assets would take time to return to the continental USA. The army and the National Guard are the biggest threats to any armed uprising since they have the benefit of more anti-personal weapons and in the case of the National Guard it has the advantage of being spread out making it hard to target.
 
2013-01-09 04:14:15 PM

Profedius: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Profedius: Having thought on the matter quite a bit and discussions with ex high ranking service member friends the scenario with the best chance of success in at least starting a revolution is where a protest movement that is somewhat non-violent gains enough members then becomes organized and switches to a violent agenda on focused targets. In order to maintain any long term resistance several military installations would need to be targeted in the opening actions focusing primarily on Air Force targets since their bases would have a lower level of armed resistance.

Your friends Army or Navy?

Both and the Air Force don't have any friends in the Marines. Nothing against the Air Force it is just an area the civilians can not currently compete with any real success once the assets are airborne, however on the ground they are combat ineffective and lightly guarded. The Navy's response is limited to long range missiles and carrier based aircraft which are not as numerous nor as easily reachable as the Air Force's. One would also have the advantage of time since naval assets would take time to return to the continental USA. The army and the National Guard are the biggest threats to any armed uprising since they have the benefit of more anti-personal weapons and in the case of the National Guard it has the advantage of being spread out making it hard to target.


Profedius: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Profedius: Having thought on the matter quite a bit and discussions with ex high ranking service member friends the scenario with the best chance of success in at least starting a revolution is where a protest movement that is somewhat non-violent gains enough members then becomes organized and switches to a violent agenda on focused targets. In order to maintain any long term resistance several military installations would need to be targeted in the opening actions focusing primarily on Air Force targets since their bases would have a lower level of armed resistance.

Your friends Army or Navy?

Both and the Air Force don't have any friends in the Marines. Nothing against the Air Force it is just an area the civilians can not currently compete with any real success once the assets are airborne, however on the ground they are combat ineffective and lightly guarded. The Navy's response is limited to long range missiles and carrier based aircraft which are not as numerous nor as easily reachable as the Air Force's. One would also have the advantage of time since naval assets would take time to return to the continental USA. The army and the National Guard are the biggest threats to any armed uprising since they have the benefit of more anti-personal weapons and in the case of the National Guard it has the advantage of being spread out making it hard to target.



All 4 branches of the service have built up anti-insurgency capabilities since the Iraq invasion. There are USAF ground troops (SPs) in Afghanistan. The future of war is low intensity with lots of involvment by non-state actors and the DOD knows this.
 
2013-01-09 04:14:41 PM

Insatiable Jesus: The only Americans in the past century and a half to take up arms and confront Govt were the Black Panthers.

The Right in this country does not have the balls to take on the Govt, though they could. Authority worshippers don't tend to revolt, although they do show up as volunteers to help load the trains. Not gonna happen, you can't go to war on a hoverround and as soon as it started, they would shut down Fox News and then they wouldn't know what to think anymore and they would go home.


1/10. Try harder next time.
 
2013-01-09 04:16:23 PM

MorePeasPlease: If things ever got so bad that the government was rounding up folks, I'd go out to animal shelters and adopt as many cats as I could bring into my house.
Then, if they knocked on my door I'd open it and cats would begin pouring out the door, and they'd say "whoa-this guy's got so many cats!"
That would be just enough of a distraction for me to sneak up into my attic and feed the younger and sicker cats that I brought back from the shelters.


This was one of my favorite Fark posts in three years of lurking plus two years as a registered user.
 
2013-01-09 04:16:24 PM

sugar_fetus: Insatiable Jesus: The only Americans in the past century and a half to take up arms and confront Govt were the Black Panthers.

The Right in this country does not have the balls to take on the Govt, though they could. Authority worshippers don't tend to revolt, although they do show up as volunteers to help load the trains. Not gonna happen, you can't go to war on a hoverround and as soon as it started, they would shut down Fox News and then they wouldn't know what to think anymore and they would go home.

1/10. Try harder next time.


just cause he's trolling doesn't mean he's wrong
 
2013-01-09 04:21:03 PM

Profedius: Both and the Air Force don't have any friends in the Marines.



Funny you say that. My husband and his crew have had Marines on the ground in Afghanistan thank them for the air support they provide. Link

As a military member whose never seen combat, I know that inter-service rivalry can be fun. My husband and my friends who have say that shiat has no place in a combat zone.
 
2013-01-09 04:28:18 PM

dittybopper: What, a common criminal with a big mouth bragging about committing federal felonies (that weren't true, btw)? Meh.

We aren't close to requiring a "Second Amendment Solution" yet. We're still on the first couple of boxes. As long as we have the first 3 in working order, we don't have to resort to the 4th.


Sorry, but yeah we're passed the first three boxes. The checks and balances built in to the constitution ensure that nothing can get done except for a trickle of more government. None of it ever gets repealed. None of it ever goes away. There's never an opt out. Things will just slowly tighten, pressure will continue to build, one spark and boom.

We're still in stage one of resistance - lots of kicking and screaming. Stage two is active civil disobedience to include tax revolts to starve out the treasury. Stage three is shooting the bastards.

And you wanna know what's gonna move us to the next stage?
1.bp.blogspot.com

This is the last amendment still kind of standing in the bill of rights. When it goes, so does civility.
 
2013-01-09 04:32:14 PM
Why does it always seem to me like the ones who complain most loudly about "jackbooted thugs" are the ones who want to wear the jackboots?
 
2013-01-09 04:43:35 PM
One other thing: If we can't trust our kid's teachers with a gun, why the hell would we trust them WITH OUR KIDS???
 
2013-01-09 04:45:15 PM
After the 2nd amendment is gone...

There goes the 4th as well. I am sure the Democrats will need to make sure you don't have guns. So now the ATF has free reign to search and seize as they want.

Will just snowball from there. Crazy thing is, as Democrats get more power, they become exactly what they used to biatch about. If they get the house, it is all over for tyhe country.
 
2013-01-09 04:46:20 PM

Champion of the Sun: sugar_fetus: Insatiable Jesus: The only Americans in the past century and a half to take up arms and confront Govt were the Black Panthers.

The Right in this country does not have the balls to take on the Govt, though they could. Authority worshippers don't tend to revolt, although they do show up as volunteers to help load the trains. Not gonna happen, you can't go to war on a hoverround and as soon as it started, they would shut down Fox News and then they wouldn't know what to think anymore and they would go home.

1/10. Try harder next time.

just cause he's trolling doesn't mean he's wrong


Randy Weaver did. And in a certain way, he won. It came with huge cost, though.
 
2013-01-09 04:46:33 PM

Fubegra: Why does it always seem to me like the ones who complain most loudly about "jackbooted thugs" are the ones who want to wear the jackboots?


I;m still wondering why most of the gun owners are the ones being civil in threads like this but the people in favor of gun control are the ones wishing violence upon people who disagree with them.


Its like one side is more immature (or more mature depending on what side you are on I guess) than the other......
 
2013-01-09 04:48:29 PM

HeadLever: Champion of the Sun: sugar_fetus: Insatiable Jesus: The only Americans in the past century and a half to take up arms and confront Govt were the Black Panthers.

The Right in this country does not have the balls to take on the Govt, though they could. Authority worshippers don't tend to revolt, although they do show up as volunteers to help load the trains. Not gonna happen, you can't go to war on a hoverround and as soon as it started, they would shut down Fox News and then they wouldn't know what to think anymore and they would go home.

1/10. Try harder next time.

just cause he's trolling doesn't mean he's wrong

Randy Weaver did. And in a certain way, he won. It came with huge cost, though.


A warrant gone wrong does not a revolution make.

/owns a copy of 2nd signed by Weaver
//Left in rental house by methheads
 
2013-01-09 04:57:17 PM

Insatiable Jesus: A warrant gone wrong does not a revolution make.


It was a little bit more than a warrant gone wrong. However, you are correct that it was not a revoution. It was, however a citizen using the second amendment to take on the Federal Government. If it was not for his guns, he would have been steamrolled and the shenanigans of the ATF/Federal Government would have likely never been exposed.
 
2013-01-09 05:58:05 PM

freetomato: Profedius: Both and the Air Force don't have any friends in the Marines.


Funny you say that. My husband and his crew have had Marines on the ground in Afghanistan thank them for the air support they provide. Link

As a military member whose never seen combat, I know that inter-service rivalry can be fun. My husband and my friends who have say that shiat has no place in a combat zone.


Oh it is nothing like that I just don't happen to know any high ranking Marines though I do know some enlisted Marines. Your Husband is right in combat a lot of things change, but I never became involved in the whole inter-service rivalry so in combat that was not one item I did not have change. In my post my thoughts were on assets within the Continental USA the each service would have in place currently to deal with a large armed uprising of 100,000 or more people.
 
2013-01-09 06:21:34 PM

HeadLever: The Right in this country does not have the balls to take on the Govt, though they could. Authority worshippers don't tend to revolt, although they do show up as volunteers to help load the trains. Not gonna happen, you can't go to war on a hoverround and as soon as it started, they would shut down Fox News and then they wouldn't know what to think anymore and they would go home.

1/10. Try harder next time.

just cause he's trolling doesn't mean he's wrong

Randy Weaver did. And in a certain way, he won. It came with huge cost, though.


You could argue that between Ruby Ridge, Waco, and McVeigh's reprisal at Oklahoma City, the libertarians won. They killed 169 and injured over 500, whereas the federal government killed 80 and injured 10. 2nd amendment protections have strengthened, and the government overhauled they're assault rules.
 
2013-01-09 06:26:29 PM

This text is now purple: HeadLever: The Right in this country does not have the balls to take on the Govt, though they could. Authority worshippers don't tend to revolt, although they do show up as volunteers to help load the trains. Not gonna happen, you can't go to war on a hoverround and as soon as it started, they would shut down Fox News and then they wouldn't know what to think anymore and they would go home.

1/10. Try harder next time.

just cause he's trolling doesn't mean he's wrong

Randy Weaver did. And in a certain way, he won. It came with huge cost, though.

You could argue that between Ruby Ridge, Waco, and McVeigh's reprisal at Oklahoma City, the libertarians won. They killed 169 and injured over 500, whereas the federal government killed 80 and injured 10. 2nd amendment protections have strengthened, and the government overhauled they're assault rules.


No there not
 
2013-01-09 06:28:38 PM

This text is now purple: You could argue that between Ruby Ridge, Waco, and McVeigh's reprisal at Oklahoma City, the libertarians won.


Ruby Ridge the set up was completly different than Waco or the OKC Bombing and the winning part is not in the body count but how freedom is preserved. Though you are right about Waco being part of the change regarding rules of engagement and due process requirements.
 
2013-01-09 06:57:19 PM

HeadLever: This text is now purple: You could argue that between Ruby Ridge, Waco, and McVeigh's reprisal at Oklahoma City, the libertarians won.

Ruby Ridge the set up was completly different than Waco or the OKC Bombing and the winning part is not in the body count but how freedom is preserved. Though you are right about Waco being part of the change regarding rules of engagement and due process requirements.


Ruby Ridge was much smaller-scale, but there were many similarities between Ruby Ridge and Waco in the government's handle of them (down to some of the same people), and the Senate hearings encompassed both.

McVeigh openly stated his Murrah building attack was in response to both Ruby Ridge and Waco.
 
2013-01-09 06:59:20 PM
USA, 2040:

"Sir, someone was tweeting negative comments about the government in sector 5, grid 12."
"Neutralize them an unmanned drone, private, same as always."
"Right away Sir!"
 
2013-01-09 07:06:55 PM

This text is now purple: McVeigh openly stated his Murrah building attack was in response to both Ruby Ridge and Waco.


Yep.

I've read that he handed out cards with the Ruby Ridge sniper's name and address at gun shows and other events.
 
2013-01-09 07:36:01 PM
I'm late to the party, but wow, a lot of people in here are really excited about drone strikes on their fellow citizens.
 
2013-01-09 07:51:47 PM
We should be more like Britain
 
2013-01-09 09:26:24 PM

Jarhead_h: dittybopper: What, a common criminal with a big mouth bragging about committing federal felonies (that weren't true, btw)? Meh.

We aren't close to requiring a "Second Amendment Solution" yet. We're still on the first couple of boxes. As long as we have the first 3 in working order, we don't have to resort to the 4th.

Sorry, but yeah we're passed the first three boxes. The checks and balances built in to the constitution ensure that nothing can get done except for a trickle of more government. None of it ever gets repealed. None of it ever goes away. There's never an opt out. Things will just slowly tighten, pressure will continue to build, one spark and boom.

We're still in stage one of resistance - lots of kicking and screaming. Stage two is active civil disobedience to include tax revolts to starve out the treasury. Stage three is shooting the bastards.

And you wanna know what's gonna move us to the next stage?
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 479x421]

This is the last amendment still kind of standing in the bill of rights. When it goes, so does civility.


There's never going to be any Tea Party uprising. The Republicans will be the ones chomping at the bit to herd everyone onto the trains, provided that it's Liberals and Mexicans being sent off to the extermination camps.

What did right-wingers have to say when the Occupy folks were being sent to jail in batches of 1000? "Serves them right. They shouldn't have been breaking the law..."
 
2013-01-09 11:55:47 PM

pciszek: They would be rolling those tanks over a lot of houses belonging to people who had no connection to the militia you were after. They can get away with that in Afghanistan or Iraq, but it would lead to trouble in the US.


And what would people do about it? Especially if there were no news reporting it.

dittybopper: Besides which, legally the government can't prevent the news media from reporting on such things. Any government that tried would be in violation of the Constitution, and thus illegitimate.


Nem Wan: Suspending the Constitution is unconstitutional.


And when a national emergency has been declared and FEMA suspends the Constitution, there's not just a whole hell of a lot the media would be reporting on. I don't like it any more than anyone else does, but that is one of their emergency powers.

 
2013-01-10 12:05:55 AM
Am I the only one who is a little bit sickened by the fact that some of my countrymen are slavering for another civil war?
 
2013-01-10 12:33:12 AM

freetomato: Am I the only one who is a little bit sickened by the fact that some of my countrymen are slavering for another civil war?


You didn't like the outcome of the first one?
 
2013-01-10 12:33:58 AM

caramba421: What did right-wingers have to say when the Occupy folks were being sent to jail in batches of 1000? "Serves them right. They shouldn't have been breaking the law..."


They told you to move, you didn't, now take your lumps and fight them in court?

Did any of them follow through and fight their charges in court? Whatever happend to those OWS guys?

It's not like blocking roads and disobeying police orders were legal when they did it, and government decided that we couldn;t have people blocking roads and disobeying police orders so they created a new law making all of the people blocking roads and disobeying police orders criminals.....like how owning an AR is legal.....and the government wants to make it illegal making millions of Americans criminals after the fact...or whatever.

--------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---------------------------------
The_Sponge

I only have 3 true safe queens....a Springfield/Krag 1892 and a Holland and Holland double rifle in .500ne and one in .375hhmag....those 3 combined are probably worth around 50k now if not more.

The Noveskes and LaRues I own are just damn fine rifles with absolute incredible fit and finish.....If I didn;t know any better I would guess they were made in Germany.

I have 2 full rifles from Noveske, one in .300blk, and one in 6.8spc.
The LaRue is in 7.62 and has a 20" barrel

I also have assorted uppers chambered for 5.56 in various configurations from both companies(the upper is where the accuracy comes from and I can swap out a pinned 14.5 ,16'', 18'' or 20'' upper onto any of my lowers from other manufactures) but I shoot them often (1k rounds a month)so they are dinged and scratched like any of my hammers or wrenches in my toolbox.

Nobody needs a Noveske or LaRue but they do rate at the top of the scale.....and hopefully if all goes as planned I will compete in a national match with one.
 
2013-01-10 02:25:39 AM

freetomato: Profedius: Having thought on the matter quite a bit and discussions with ex high ranking service member friends the scenario with the best chance of success in at least starting a revolution is where a protest movement that is somewhat non-violent gains enough members then becomes organized and switches to a violent agenda on focused targets. In order to maintain any long term resistance several military installations would need to be targeted in the opening actions focusing primarily on Air Force targets since their bases would have a lower level of armed resistance.

The only ones allowed to carry firearms on ANY CONUS military base are the military police, from what I understand - I'm sure there are exceptions. So in a suprise attack, very few on base would be armed (see Fort Hood shooter).  Is this assumption based on the fact that the USAF has no infantry-types?  I still can't see an Air Force base being overtaken by an angry mob of militia-men.  I think you are underestimating what they'd be up against, trying to overtake ANY military facility for that matter.


USAF Combat Control
www.americanspecialops.com

www.af.mil

www.defense.gov
 
2013-01-10 03:45:22 AM
Angry Jailhouse Fistfark

-666/10

I still larfed though :)

Please consider my rating a friendly lefthanded compliment.

Also:

Why are some of you rubbing one out SO VERY STRENUOUSLY over killing your fellow Americans?
 
2013-01-10 03:56:11 AM
Um the 2nd amendment is designed to foster a resource for the government, not to oppose it.

Wouldn't a well-regulated local militia be a great resource if centralized forces were unable to respond? The Texas territories could police themselves several weeks ride from D.D. Wouldn't gun-owning citizens make a worthwhile pool of subjects to draft from?

Armed populace = strategic reserve in 1795.
 
Displayed 50 of 424 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report