All NRA and GOA members need to acknowledge the following facts . . .

[Kirkrapine]

The militia could and should go against the state if the state is violating the Constitution.

That is a formula for a failed state, Somalia-level, and you wouldn't like it there. You probably would like it better in North Korea.

 

[BotanyBoy]

That is a formula for a failed state,

Done pretty well so far.

Somalia-level, and you wouldn't like it there.

I liked it better than Iraq....and New Jersey for that matter.

You probably would like it better in North Korea.

LOL no...I'm not big on socialism.

I'd much rather be in shitzville Africa than N. Korea....or Venezuela.

 

[Kirkrapine]

Done pretty well so far.

Only because "militia could and should go against the state" situation has never arisen here. If it ever does . . . then the militiamen will die, and that's the best-case scenario.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Only because "militia could and should go against the state" situation has never arisen here.

Doesn't mean it couldn't.

If it ever does . . .

The left isn't that powerful in Washington DC.

then the militiamen will die, and that's the best-case scenario.

No...some will, many many more civilians will get greased all over the walls/streets and the offensive authoritarian dicks will loose the support of the public.

The militia won't be out marching to their deaths in formation.

They will look just like everyone else. It would be a guerrilla insurgency lead and run by millions of retired operators the US military taught how to train, organize and use local civilian populations to effectively wage war that the state would have a near impossible time fighting.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

Mao would disagree.


It's just about the only thing I agree with him on.


And he's a bit more experienced than the OP, so . . . .

 

[oggbashan]

The UK had a militia in WW2.

It was called the Home Guard. It was trained by professional soldiers even if many of them were long retired from active service. It could not have taken on the UK government's armed forces and wouldn't have wanted to.

It could have impeded the advance of a German invasion force even after that force had landed successfully. It couldn't have defeated it. It might have slowed its progress, dissipated its troops chasing shadows, and allowed regular troops to confront the Germans on favourable terms.

The Home Guard's kill record is a matter of shame. They killed more friendly troops than enemies. Young and old trainees without battle experience were inclined to shoot first and ask questions later.

 

[IG_88]

. . . before they open their mouths again:

1. Guns are politically useless. You cannot use them to fight the government with any hope of success at all. (If you are thinking of Cliven Bundy as a counterexample, remember that he is now in jail; the state can be effectively fought in court and nowhere else.)

2. No one but a collector really needs more than one or two firearms.

3. No civilian has any legitimate use whatsoever for an automatic or semi-automatic rifle; that is much more firepower than you will ever need for hunting or home defense.

4. The actual purpose of the Second Amendment was to facilitate a militia-based defense policy, which is completely dated and irrelevant now; nor was the militia ever conceived as a countervailing force against the state rather than an arm of the state.

5. Yes, guns do kill people, in the same sense that motor vehicles get into accidents and pollute the air.

It's early and I'm bored so...

1. I tend to half assed agree but also know how many countries it has happened in and even against the mighty US military so I still say bullshit. Guerrilla warfare has been shown to be highly effective.

2. Obviously you're not a hunter or sport shooter or biathlete and know little to nothing of home defense.

3. It's the auto/semi-auto argument again. yay. Nobody has auto. Nobody who matters anyway. And those who do or who have fired full auto weapons know that in 99.9% of cases it's just a big 'ol waste of ammo.
Semi-auto...pretty much every gun made. We've been down this road before. All handguns are semi-auto minus a few weird ones. Most rifles and shotguns are. It has little to do with firepower. The most common gun in the country is the Ruger 10/22. A semi-auto .22 that is often the first gun people shoot. It's perfect for small game hunting and defense in a pinch cuz it's short barrel, easy to load, dependable and mostly accurate.
A large number of hunting guns are semi-auto. Not so much long range stuff for bear or moose or whatnot but anything from a deer on down.

4. SCOTUS says you're full of shit.

5. No guns do not kill people. They are inanimate objects. So are cars and airplanes and everything else used to kill. They only work when someone is operating them. People are evil not hunks of metal. Nuclear weapons are not evil, they're uranium and rocket fuel and circuitry surrounded by metal and plastic. Hundreds of thousands dead at the push of a button but it takes a person to intentionally target a city and push that button.
In Las Vegas a gun didn't bust out a window, figure the angles, target and shoot. A person did that. The gun was just sorta laying there just like it was when the guy finally died. Useless and safe as a kitten without someone behind the trigger.

See this is the same shit said over and over and over. Your dumbass thread won't change that. You're ignorance of the history of these arguments doesn't change that. It's been beaten to death and that's why nobody jumped in here when you made the thread.
You need something new to get people interested again. So like I said, wait for another school shooting or Vegas or something like that. You'll get all kinds of people caring then. At least for a couple days until they see a shiny object in another outrage du jour.

 

[phrodeau]

So you're saying the thing that kills is actually the screw on the trigger.

 

[BotanyBoy]

So you're saying the thing that kills is actually the screw on the trigger.

Where did anyone even suggest such a thing?

 

[Kirkrapine]

Depends on what kind, not that it really matters how many one has, 3 or 30.

Small pistol for concealed carry, large one for sport/tacticool.

Small cal rifle for varmints/small game...battle rifle for home defense/medium game and a heavy cal one hitter quitter for big game.

long bore shotty for bird hunting, pump action for a home defender and a semi auto for competition shooting

That's a bare minimum.

Bullshit. Unless you are a soldier, shooting is not surgery and you do not need a range of specialized instruments. What will kill a deer will kill a home invader.

 

[IG_88]

Bullshit. Unless you are a soldier, shooting is not surgery and you do not need a range of specialized instruments. What will kill a deer will kill a home invader.

That just shows an absolute ignorance of guns and how they work.

 

[Kirkrapine]

4. SCOTUS says you're full of shit.

History says I'm right.

5. No guns do not kill people. They are inanimate objects. So are cars and airplanes and everything else used to kill. They only work when someone is operating them. People are evil not hunks of metal. Nuclear weapons are not evil, they're uranium and rocket fuel and circuitry surrounded by metal and plastic. Hundreds of thousands dead at the push of a button but it takes a person to intentionally target a city and push that button.
In Las Vegas a gun didn't bust out a window, figure the angles, target and shoot. A person did that. The gun was just sorta laying there just like it was when the guy finally died. Useless and safe as a kitten without someone behind the trigger.

See post #6, and read it this time.

 

[SissySalina]

Is that not obvious? Private ownership of AK-47s in Iraq was widespread before Hussein fell. It didn't matter. Even when the populace is armed, the state always wins by being better armed, and better organized. That might not have been true in the 18th Century, but it is true now and for the indefinite future. How are them Zapatistas doin'? Not, you may be sure, costing sleep to anyone in Mexico City.



Really, what use is a third, whether for hunting or home defense?



Again, obvious. If you are ever in a non-military situation you can't resolve with a one-shot-at-a-pull firearm, a higher rate of fire won't help.

Of course, automatic rifles are not really a significant factor in American gunshot deaths, most of which involve pistols; but they are, for obvious reasons, the weapon of choice for mass shooters, which for some reason we seem to have in greater abundance than any other country, including failed states.



This is historically true. That is why the Constitution empowers the president to command the militia.



I note that no one has yet really contradicted this. Nor can anyone deny that fewer guns floating around means fewer homicides, suicides, and accidental deaths and injuries. We'll always have knives and clubs and such, but taken in the aggregate they don't do nearly as much damage.

1. Tell that to the Russian Revolution, and by the way the American Revolution.

2. Guns 1 or 2 could jam needing a 3.

3. If you are against several opponents an auto come in handy, ask the U.S. Army.

4. I you check you will find that the militia belonged to the States and Commonwealths not the Federal Government.

5. A gun just sitting there doesn't kill, some idiot has to pick it up.

Still waiting on your good facts?

 

[IG_88]

History says I'm right.



See post #6, and read it this time.

Doesn't matter what history says, SCOTUS decides and they decided you're full of shit. As have the majority of Americans.

Never read that dumbass post the first time. Still don't mean shit. A gun is completely, totally, utterly incapable of injuring anyone on it's own. As is a car or anything else.

 

[Kirkrapine]

3. If you are against several opponents an auto come in handy, ask the U.S. Army.

But, nobody but a soldier or a gangster is ever against several opponents.

4. I you check you will find that the militia belonged to the States and Commonwealths not the Federal Government.

So what? It certainly was never intended to fight the federal government. Can anyone seriously deny Washington did the right thing in putting down the Whiskey Rebellion?

 

[IG_88]

But, nobody but a soldier or a gangster is ever against several opponents.

100% pure bullshit

 

[Que]

Iraqi, Afghani and Vietnamese militias/insurgents are all modern examples of that not being true....among many others.



Depends on what kind, not that it really matters how many one has, 3 or 30.

Small pistol for concealed carry, large one for sport/tacticool.

Small cal rifle for varmints/small game...battle rifle for home defense/medium game and a heavy cal one hitter quitter for big game.

long bore shotty for bird hunting, pump action for a home defender and a semi auto for competition shooting

That's a bare minimum.



That would be semi-automatic, like the AR-15.



Absolutely wrong, most mass shootings are done with semi-automatic pistols, there have only ever been a couple of mass shootings with full auto hardware.



Not entirely, but mostly.

The militia could and should go against the state if the state is violating the Constitution.

I laughed.

It is instructive the degree of ignorance about guns and their utility that is prevalent in anti-hardware nuts.

Same people who are also dead-sure that their indoctrination in other areas is enlightened. It takes a special kind of sheep to both promote the inherent authoritarianism necessary in order to implement their political ideas and the disarmament of the population.

Convenient how their history "education" all contains the same distortions, omissions, and outright falsehoods.

 

[Kirkrapine]

It takes a special kind of sheep to both promote the inherent authoritarianism necessary in order to implement their political ideas and the disarmament of the population.

Bear in mind that the British and the Japanese are disarmed -- and free, and no sheep.

 

[IG_88]

Bear in mind that the British and the Japanese are disarmed -- and free, and no sheep.

They are less free than we are. Few countries enjoy the freedoms we do. We're the Wild West for the rest of the world. People come here for the same reasons we went west. Money and freedom. Both have a few gunfights involved.

 

[IG_88]

Now I wanna watch Tombstone. And it's Sunday so I can't. That sucks.

 

[IG_88]

You gotta admit our fascination with gunplay has made for some seriously awesome cinematic moments. The Chinese are pretty damn good at it, too. Fuckin' John Wick alone makes us king. Brits get some credit for Kingsman. That church scene is pure badass joy.

 

[SissySalina]

But, nobody but a soldier or a gangster is ever against several opponents.



So what? It certainly was never intended to fight the federal government. Can anyone seriously deny Washington did the right thing in putting down the Whiskey Rebellion?

3. Sorry but have seen several instances where there we several robbers, just the other day there was a house robbed by 4.

4. So what are the facts? The subject was fact not intent. You can subject a lot of intent into the Constitution but intent then is not fact now.

 

[splish splash]

. . . before they open their mouths again:

1. Guns are politically useless. You cannot use them to fight the government with any hope of success at all. (If you are thinking of Cliven Bundy as a counterexample, remember that he is now in jail; the state can be effectively fought in court and nowhere else.)

2. No one but a collector really needs more than one or two firearms.

3. No civilian has any legitimate use whatsoever for an automatic or semi-automatic rifle; that is much more firepower than you will ever need for hunting or home defense.

4. The actual purpose of the Second Amendment was to facilitate a militia-based defense policy, which is completely dated and irrelevant now; nor was the militia ever conceived as a countervailing force against the state rather than an arm of the state.

5. Yes, guns do kill people, in the same sense that motor vehicles get into accidents and pollute the air.

So you get to pick what Amendment to abide by

 

[BotanyBoy]

Bullshit. Unless you are a soldier, shooting is not surgery and you do not need a range of specialized instruments. What will kill a deer will kill a home invader.

Not bullshit, I just explained in detail how it's not bullshit.

Yes they do require specialized instruments, you don't shoot a pigeon or rabbit with a deer rifle and you don't defend your house with a plinker or bird shot in a .410 if you have anything better....like a shovel.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

No, he's picking what amendment that you get to abide by.