Posted on 04/27/2009 7:46:42 AM PDT by TADSLOS
So you consider killing Nazi death camp guards or KGB killers the equivalent of "murdering cops" in the USA?
You are sick, and you seriously need to evaluate your soul and your values.
Jimmy,
Give up your SS protection by those with “assault weapons” (a BS term) and I will consider giving up mine.
Until then, STFU.
The Commies tried banning typewriters, copiers and PCs. Fat lot of good it did them.
Now I wonder what relatively small metal things one could make with these gadgets: http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/04/reprap-financial-and-societal-impact.html
But none of us wants to own an assault weapon,
Speak for yourself.
Shouldn't he be in some third world country helping a petty tyrant like Chavez steal an election?
You presume that every person with a verboten firearm (or 10) will sit still and wait for the cops, etc. to come to their home with overwhelming force. One who does that will, assuredly, lose. But fighting an enemy's strength, and at the time and place of his choosing, is not what any smart tactician or strategist will do. Did you ever consider that some people will, when a certain line in their own mind is crossed, decide to go hunting? You see, they don't believe that the bullets should all be going in one direction, and many of them have been trained by Uncle. Nope, they'll hunt down those who give orders, those who passed laws, those who expended great amounts of ink or wattage to support the lawmakers and the order-givers.
That's not a threat by me, nor is it advise or encouragement to anyone to illegally use force against anyone or any property, most especially government employees or government property. No sir. But it is an observation. The relatively few who call the shots (no pun intended) can count - and that is precisely the reason why the 2nd has never really had to be pressed into service. It would be quite tragic if the general societal aversion to simple mathematics has reached the highest levels of our government.
Oh, one thing about tanks (and other modern equipment). There's an apochryphal (spelling??) story about Marshall Tito from his pre-Marshall days as a partisan leader in WW2 Yugoslavia. He was once asked "how can your partisans, with their old rifles, possible tank on the Germans, with their new tanks?" Tito responded, "When the Germans get out of their new tanks to take a piss, my partisans will shoot them with their old rifles." Just a variation on not fighting an enemy at his strongest point.
Uh, TAKE on the Germans....
Obama will certainly get to this after he passes his priority
items.
They know that it would be very difficult to take all those weapons in a number of disparate places by force.
They're first choice will be to use the law to disarm the law-abiding using an incremental 'divide and conquer' strategy – get the EBR's first, then the handguns, then....
Nope. My response was to your post. You apparently want to institute Solzhenitsyn’s recommendations for resistance against the KGB in today’s America.
Doing so would immediately involve killing a whole bunch of cops. If you disagree, please read the Solzhenitsyn quote again and explain how it could be implemented without doing so.
My entire point was that killing SS or KGB was morally justified, while killing cops in today’s America is NOT. You’re the one who apparently considers those enforcing American laws as the moral equivalent of SS or KGB and therefore equally legitimate targets of violent resistance.
Please don’t post things like this: “What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? and then claim it doesn’t call for murder of LEOs. If you apply it to America today, and otherwise why post it?, of course it does.
65 million gun owners, a couple of million of them former military, with a good chunk being former SpecOps.
Unprecedented Weapons sales in the last 6 months and enough stockpiled Ammo to feed the entire U.S. Military for a year.
Yeah it could be a bad situation, but it could be worse... If Americans did not have the protection of the Second Amendment to keep the wolves at bay.
“But none of us wants to own an assault weapon, because we have no desire to kill policemen or go to a school or workplace to see how many victims we can accumulate before we are finally shot or take our own lives”
And, as I recall, each of the recent horrible shootings took place with the guns you indicate YOU own. No assault weapons unless you count the look-a-likes used by the felon who was banned from owning a gun in Calif.
The original post to which I responded did not refer to taking his weapons and assassinating officials with whom he disagreed. It referred, at least by implication, to waiting in his home for the government’s goons and then resisting them with equivalent or superior firepower.
My post was not intended as a treatise on the possibilities for guerrilla war in America, merely pointing out that if you try to hold a particular position (your home) against government attack you will lose.
See Ruby Ridge and Waco.
With extraordinarily rare exceptions, guerrilla warfare must always be hit and run. Stand and fight is a synonym for stand and die. Given the weaponry used at Waco, this is likely to include the family, the neighbors, etc.
The “cold, dead hands” proclamation might be brave, but anybody planning to hold his home against attack should recognize that is exactly what will happen. They will take his guns from his cold, dead hands.
BTW, the tactics you propose might work in an America where 80% to 90% of the people support the fighters. It will not work in the much more likely scenario where the freedom fighters are close to or even well under 50% in their support.
The Second Amendment isn't about hunting. Nice try, though. I'll give it a 4/10.
You are probably correct; facing off against them will be suicide. But a few guerillas can have a big effect. When they start finding their comrades dead in the morning, I'll bet a lot of them will make a sudden change in career choice.
We need to know how many Oath Keepers are on our side in the police forces and military; we know Obama's people won't be unless we can get them well infiltrated.
I don't expect to live forever, but may be faced with the tough choice- die sooner than need be, or live enslaved.
With a "family woods" to hunt in, how nice. We can just see him, out with the old 30-30 Marlin, shootin' at some food.
What that has to do with the 2nd. amendment I don't know.
Oh yeah - besides free health care he's got armed body guards to help him reach that advanced age. I wonder if he makes them carry breech loading single shots or allows them the whole of 19th. century firepower up to revolvers & lever guns?
It seem he forgot that the primary purpose of a weapon, from George Washington's point of view anyways, is to restrain evil influence and defend the nation from tyrants.
”Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty, teeth and keystone under independence. The church, the plow, the prairie wagon and citizens’ firearms are indelibly related. From the hour the pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that, to ensure peace, security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable. Every corner of this land knows firearms, and more than 99 and 99/100 percent of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil influence. They deserve a place of honor with all that’s good. When firearms go, all goes. We need them every hour.” - George Washington
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.