Does anyone else get the feeling that these technical innovations in counter-insurgency warfare make the second amendment even more irrelevent than it already is when it comes to protecting against the government?
You think the Second Amendment is irrelevant?
“Does anyone else get the feeling that these technical innovations in counter-insurgency warfare make the second amendment even more irrelevent than it already is when it comes to protecting against the government?”
IMO it makes it even more important.
Yep.....I was thinking the very same.
RElax.
These kinds of technologies end up being like radar guns for cops. First someone invents the radar gun. Then the radar detector. Then better radar. THen better detectors. Then instant on radar. THen...
They will never be king of the hill forever.
“Does anyone else get the feeling that these technical innovations in counter-insurgency warfare make the second amendment even more irrelevent than it already is when it comes to protecting against the government?”
You obviously know nothing of the second or this device or sniper rifles. Just shut up and wear your chains quietly.
Does anyone else get the feeling that these technical innovations in counter-insurgency warfare make the second amendment even more irrelevant than it already is when it comes to protecting against the government?
That’s the kind of shooting that won WWII.
Moreover, a technological population has more potential weapons at its disposal than just the small arms its individuals have at hand. A simplistic example is the case of the West Virginia State Guard, back in the ‘80’s. The unit, knowing itself to be part of the legal State Militia, believed that the laws permitted itself to obtain and maintain heavy weapons, and so they obtained 3 M24 light tanks and a 75mm mountain howitzer. All had been ‘demilitarized,’ but the State Guardsmen included machinists, who put them back in working order. They then secured these privately owned but State Militia dedicated ordinance items at State NG Armories. Where they were discovered by state and Federal officials, to their horror.
Said authorities, since the State Guardsmen had neglected to obtain anyone's authorization to reactivate these weapons, confiscated them. Now imagine that these had not been trusting and law-abiding citizens, but fed-up individuals feeling oppressed by the recurring petty tyrannies of a government aiming to bring them to a state of subjection and slavery.
Bookmark
I get into these kinds of arguments with my students all the time. "Can't fight a real army" goes the thinking. Well, look at recent history: The Afghans fought the biggest and most well equipped army in the world (USSR) to a standstill in the 1980s. They did so with what amounts to 18th century level firearms. Yes, they had help with US Stingers courtesy of Charlie Wilson. But the spirit of the warrior is what carried them thru those dark and often frozen nights, all alone and facing an enemy with far superior numbers and technology.
The 2nd Amendment simply represents the base level of an age old doctrine of war. Call it "TRADE UP." If I have a 22, I can trade up to an M4. If I have an M4 I can trade up to a SAW. If I have a SAW, I can trade up to an artillery piece or possibly an MLRS platform. Such is the way armies are equipped. But it does require a base tool to start the trade up process. Thus the 2nd Amendment. Many folks won't have to start with a 22 so their trade up process can proceed much quicker. Also, many Americans wisely foresaw such a necessity and started their collections of firearms in both NATO and WARSAW PACT calibers, many of which are also in common use with police departments.
Also, I don't expect the numbers to show solely citizens on one side and military/LEOs on the other. Although the numbers have been shrinking since the 1960s when liberalism and globalism began to infect the school curriculum's across the nation, I suspect there are still substantial numbers of soldiers and police officers who know the real score and I think we can count on their support at the proper moment.
Kids ask me how do I expect to deal with a tank? Hey I was a tanker for awhile. I know the things that make tankers sweat bricks under maneuver conditions. You can stop a tanks in it's tracks with simple barbed wire. That's a mobility kill only though. He'll still have use of all weapons, he just won't be able to move. Still, a paralyzed tank becomes a "fixed fortification." And as General George S. Patton once said: Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man. Paralyzed tanks can be overcome.
Iron sights baby ... iron sights.
It would seem to make it more relevant and broader in its scope, to include countering technology.