Skip to comments.Hunters – The World’s Largest Army
Posted on 11/03/2013 11:47:25 AM PST by Red in Blue PA
Thoughts on Hunters, this is an interesting slant on things. The worlds largest army; Americas hunters! I had never thought about this, but a blogger added up the deer license sales in just a handful of states and arrived at a striking conclusion:
There were over 600,000 hunters this season in the state of Wisconsin. Allow me to restate that number: 600,000. Over the last several months, Wisconsins hunters became the eighth largest army in the world: more men in arms than in Iran. More than France and Germany combined. These men and women deployed to the woods of a single American state, Wisconsin, to hunt with firearms, and no one was killed.
That number pales in comparison to the 750,000 who hunted the woods of Pennsylvania and Michigans 700,000 hunters, all of whom have now returned home safely. Toss in a quarter million hunters in West Virginia and it literally establishes the fact that the hunters of those four states alone would comprise the largest army in the world. And then add in the total number of hunters in the other 46 states. Its millions more.
(Excerpt) Read more at bearmilleroutdoors.com ...
I don’t hunt, but I will join the hunter army when it starts culling the Leftist herd.
It’s why the liberals want to take away firearms of any type...mostly the cousins of true military assault rifles...just think what would have happened if the British didn’t allow the Colonialist muskets - only crossbows or sling shots...made a big difference to stand toe-to-toe with the Brown Bess when one was armed like wise!
Texas? Please include us.
I don't think the DNR people would ever support anything like a legal hunting season on Liberals. But I think a private hunting preserve stocked with wild Occupy Wall Street types would be quite popular...
The last I saw, there are 90 million gun owners who own somewhere around 400 million firearms, 75 million of which are rifles. Yamamoto was right when he talked about a rifle behind every blade of grass.
I do desire a double rifle in .45-70 or .30-06 for hunting mid to larger game.
***just think what would have happened if the British didnt allow the Colonialist muskets.***
Back in the 1870s the British in South Africa ordered all blacks to register their “Birmingham gas pipes”, a slang term for a trade musket.
The guns were then seized. Natives who protested got their muskets back so damaged they were useless.
Unlicensed hunter here too. Millions own guns that do not possess licenses. I won’t need one til they make one for hunting commies.
While this is a nice sentiment, it is absolutely disillusion. Push comes to shove, a vast majority of that army of hunters people like to talk about will willingly fall in line when threatened with force from the government.
This conservative army swells again by the number of individuals that have arms but do not hunt.
Now percentagewise you are making me feel downright greedy.
“A disorderly mob is no more an army than a heap of building materials is a house.” - Socrates
And if every hunter has at least one firearm. Two firearms. Three firearms.
The Battle of Athens: Restoring the Rule of Law
While this is a nice sentiment, it is absolutely disillusion.
I'm not so sure, given the math...
Push comes to shove, a vast majority of that army of hunters people like to talk about will willingly fall in line when threatened with force from the government.
I agree, but let's look at the numbers. Let's say the vast majority is 90%. That leaves approx. two million hunters. Let's say for the argument, that 40% of that 2M are vets. Now, get into organizing (command structure, commo, logistics, force multipliers, training, etc.), and what do you have? The force structure (minus the toys), of the current U.S. Army.
Food for thought. Thirty three percent of the colonists were against the British. Only about 30% of those actually fought. You know how that turned out.
Think about it. Not as dismal as you would postulate...although the carnage would make the first war between the states look like a walk in the park on a warm spring day.
Hunters are no disorderly mob. If they were, hundreds would be shot and killed on opening day every year in every state. Hunters already follow some pretty strict rules with no oversight.
I don’t hunt because unless I am eating it, I’m not killing animals. Also fervently hoping it doesn’t ever have to come to that.
Keep in mind that IF forces in the US ever turned on the citizens, they have families HERE, and they need to put their heads on a pillow each night.
When forces go overseas, their family is safe thousands of miles away. That would not be the case here.
War is hell; they had better do the calculations before they tread on the citizens.
Yamamoto wasn’t developing drones and mini-drones, placing surveillance cameras at intersections of every main urban road and the interstates, and developing armed robots to deal with those behind the blades of grass.
Technology enables folks to be wiped out before they ever physically see or engage anyone. It would have to happen lightning quick across the entire nation with tens of millions of folks acting together.
But the point remains, without organization, leadership, discipline and a common goal, thinking we are an “army” is fantasy.
this is why so many foreign troops are here - obama’s going to use them, estimated at 400,000 or so. probably stick them in us uniforms and they’ll know limited english, enough to do whatever they have to do.
Yeah they said the same back in the late 1700s.
And what about cross-country truckers? Aren’t they a rolling army? How many cross-country truckers do we have?
Those cameras and drones would be the first casualties.
I won't argue the fact that in the event of a shooting war there would be a HUGE block of the population that could form the core of a resistance movement, or a cadre for a standing army. I just think that it is not related very closely to the great numbers of hunter there are in the country, and anyone how hangs their hopes on the number is not looking at things realistically.
Add to that there a lot more former military than active duty. And a lot of them are armed and remember their training.
What is the expression, “Not as lean, but still a Marine”?
The forces who beat the British at Concord were not disorganized. Every town militia met regularly for drill, and had elected officers. Moreover they were backed by a corps of Minute Men, who were trained to the level of professional soldiers. They had a unified regional command structure and political organization that became the nucleus of the Continental Army.
If you like your game, you will be able to keep your game. Period.
We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that weve set. Weve got to have a civilian national security force thats just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded. Barack Hussein Obama, 7/2/2008
What could possibly go wrong?
See you when the power cuts back on.
All you say makes sense.... So why did all that high tech fire power fail to pacify Afghanistan against less then 50000 AL-quida?
If you like your power, you will be able to keep your power. Period.
If you like your electronic conveniences, you will be able to keep your electronic conveniences. Period.
The Afghans are not disorganized. They have the oldest military organization in the world, clans and tribes. They have been fighting as such for thousands of years. The entire purpose of life for an Afghan tribesman is to be a warrior worthy of his ancestors.
afghanistan vs america is apples and oranges in too many different ways to count.
Hope you are doing well.
If we were willing to shoulder those odds, however, the 90 million rifle owners would win handily.
Key fact: a small unit that knows each other well and has a shared training history can beat a larger group of strangers ANY DAY.
That is part of why The Founders feared standing armies.
How often do hunters train together with division of responsibilities...?
BTW the Yamamoto quote so loved was made up.
The cops have VERY intimate contact with the citizenry on a daily basis, yet what do we see more and more of...?
As long as they are fed the cops and soldiers WILL follow their shocking orders...
When a nation fights a series of long, low-intensity wars, soldiers are expected to act like cops and in time, cops act like soldiers.
The cops and soldiers will have NO PROBLEM shooting at us.
Many of them come fro places where it is very natural for troops to be used in policing roles.
Some might even enjoy it.
That is why the Japanese knew invading the US in WW2 was impossible.
Date of Report: September 13, 1995
Congress clearly did not, and does not, understand how deeply affected ordinary Americans were by their government’s actions at Ruby Ridge and at Waco; this is true for New Yorkers, no less than for Idahoans and Texans. That failure, and the growing feeling that their representatives are not doing just that - namely, representing THEM - has become the source of a great deal of widespread frustration among Americans.
The Operation Lexington-Concord is the first study, ever, of its kind - a nationwide survey and analysis of the attitudes of legal gun-owners in America. Unlike the biased, politically-contaminated studies often presented by groups and organizations which have a firearm-prohibitionist agenda, [that group including a fair number of studies which have appeared in the medical literature], Operation Lexington-Concord is objective, and the result of a wholly grassroots volunteer effort. And, unlike most other polls of any type, the sample size in the present study is far larger.
The importance of the findings of this study are momentous, and two unexpected findings are outstanding among all the rest:
- 51.8% of all respondents cited “government” as their greatest fear in life in America today, and
- 73.7% of all respondents stated they would actively resist governmental confiscation of their firearms.
Copy of the Full Report as presented to Congress in 1995
Vegans excepted, the ONLY difference between a hunter and a non-hunter is the non-hunter pays someone to do his killing for him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.