Posted on 09/08/2012 7:57:38 PM PDT by bopdowah
“When they come for my gun, they will have to pry it out of my cold, dead hands,” is a common refrain I often hear from the Neo-Cons when there is a threat that the US government is going to take their firearms.
And, when I hear this crazy talk, I agree with them openly. “You are right. They will pry your gun from your cold dead hands,” which I often follow with the question, “And where will that leave you except face down in a pool of your own blood the middle of the street, just another dead fool resisting the State?”
(Excerpt) Read more at whiskeyandgunpowder.com ...
You should have told him, “It will only take one pissed off patriot to shot a round into your Nazi head. Anger is a stronger emotion than fear.”
One of America’s favorite fantasies - the troops coming for the guns.
Obama has shown that he needs to do no such thing; the aggregation of unwarranted and blatantly unconstitutional government power is better done subtly, one step at a time, decade after decade, like boiling the frog.
5.56mm
If the Feds are going to bankroll (or threaten them) them....they sure are. Remember. They are UNION.
According to the Small Arms Survey 2007, there are 88.8 firearms per 100 residents of the United States, 34.2 firearms per 100 residents of Iraq and 4.6 firearms per 100 residents of Afghanistan. We have 10x the population of Iraq and 10 x the population of Afghanistan. But we’re just going to roll over here in the US?
Recently I went to a gum store with a visiting Australian. He said why in the world would anybody need to be able to buy gums? I said its only for the people who need to protect their freedom from a communist gummmint.
I guess he’s right. It has been proved in Afghanistan, Iraq and Viet Nam. Overwhelming modern military force can smash citizens with arms willing to use them. (Sarcasm)
Some of what this guy says is right, and a lot is wrong.
The Federal government under George Bush, using the the attack on 9-11 as an excuse and the “Patriot Act” as a means, had been stealthily taking steps to use military force against its own citizens. Under Barack Hussein, that thinking has been been EXPANDING to a far larger degree.
Still, the majority of Americans, and that includes many military people and police personnel, are not exactly in line with compliance.
And a great number of those citizens with weapons out there were TRAINED as military and police and have retired. And they are not about to let freedom slip so easily from the fingers of their hands and those of their offspring. Not to mention those active law enforcement and military personnel who would have serious reservations about using American military force against American citizens.
And the author’s continued use of the term “neo-con” kind of mystifies me. Neo-cons are most DEFINITELY NOT the sort to own weapons and know how to employ them.
ULTIMATELY, in ANY conflict, victory goes to the most persistent, and not to those with the best technology - as we learned to our regret in the places I mentioned above.
A sophisticated modern military may very well be able to crush another such military machine of less strength and power. But THAT does not necessarily mean the last word.
Sleep tight.
“Under what authority”
What authority did they need in Katrinafied New Orleans?
There’re problems with such nebulous conditions as “things go(ing) down.” It would take extraordinary circumstances. It could happen, though; maybe not nationally all at once, but here and there incrimentally. It’s happened elsewhere.
We would need to have a dictatorship and centralized police state in place before government agents would have the ability to engage in mass, universal gun confiscation. The command and control structure just does not exist for this action right now. First, the central government would have to create a secret police directly accountable to the dictator or central committee. The secret police would need to infiltrate and subvert state and local police forces and the military in order carry out this action. With so many local jurisdictions to control, there would likely be problems with coordination, procedures, cooperation, information leaks, and resistance from some departments.
IMO, the guns would have already been used by individuals and groups against a government that intended to impose a dictatorship and police state.
Another thought: given the high volume of trade between Canada and Mexico, legal and illegal, there would certainly be an influx of new weapons to more than replace any confiscated by the fed. And that’s assuming the Mexicans don’t steal them from the feds or get them from the feds as part of Operation Gunrunner and sell them back to Americans at a profit.
Which part of “The Government” is going to take my guns ? and what happens when “The Government” takes the guns of those who work for “The Governments” Guns ?
There will be some turn against their own peoples this is true but at some point those with this power to overthrow the people will have to realize just because they control the guns don’t mean they are immune to “The Government” and its attacks if they will ever exist !
Are we going to see Army Navy Air Force and Marines gunning down their own citizens they were sworn to protect? how many times will you hear the word “Hero” concerning our own military if this happens ?
Is “The Government” going to dis-arm the military ? if so what force would bring this to pass ? the IRS ? The Social Security offices ? Dog Catchers ? Acorn ? the FBI or CIA ? all of them combined would not match the firepower of a populace well armed !
I don’t think “We the People” are going to just walk up and turn in their guns on a whim no matter how many raids on homes occur !
Unless an unseen force invades our shores “like an Obama deal with Russians” but that is Absurd .......right ? .
In Alaska I would swear the State Troopers will go door to door GIVING away guns, really I would swear in Alaska it would be a mandated law REQUIRING everyone to be armed, if you resist you will lose your drivers license, have your wages garnished and your pets impounded.
Am I being a shade too looney?
Not when you figure that only 750,000 people live in the whole state, and what if China managed to sneak a supertanker full of hidden troops here? Its been talked about a lot, and we have the State Militia that legally can require everyone over 17 to comply or to aid in the defense of Alaska.
We don’t give a rats ass about gun laws trying to be enacted here.
He’s right: “Neo-cons” talk tough on foreign policy but are social liberals.
You would get more fight out of a libertarian, and probably a pretty good fight.
He’s confused conservatives with the LRD (`Liberals Rejected by Democrats’) “neo-cons” or “crunchy” cons, because they like granola. Get it? SEE: Weekly Standard.
http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=40298
David Frum, Bill Kristol and Rupert Murdoch & Co. probably don’t even own guns. They’re all nancy boys.
So the writer set up a strawman and knocked it down. He’s either an idiot or thinks we are, so screw him.
Well, smart guy, you should ask yourself "where will you be when the FedMob starts killing your fellow citizens in large numbers because they would rather die than submit to tyranny?" As a dead man I don't be concerned about much that's going on in this world. But what will you do?
What ... will ... you ... do?
do you think they would have any luck confiscating the guns in chicago?
They can have my pistol.
But just try and touch one of my katanas.....
This is from that p!ss-wad panty wearing lawyer twit who lives up in the mountains in Mehico.
Don’t feed this troll. (well, lead and copper-jackets would be O.K.)
That article is a joke anyway. There are at least a hundred million gun owners. There arent THAT many platoons of Marines. The local cops gonna do it? They live in the open, with families, in houses, and shop at the grocery store, and pump gas. Every dept in the USA works in a fuly permissive environment.
They simply do not have the manpower or the ability to attempt such a heavy handed approach.
Our military has been bled white in Iraq. Texas alone could swallow up the whole US military. This guys smart assed opinion aside, what makes him think we will sit in our homes, waiting for one of the scarce armored vehicles to come down our street?
When they come, there won’t BE any guns in the houses, and bet those tank drivers get “carjacked” as they pump gas off duty. They get an envelope with photos of their mother, wife, or child walking into the school.
Wars like this happen all over earth and are outrageously nasty and personal. Pray it never happens here.
But if it does, fighting on top of your own logistical tail is something that our military is simply not designed for.
Im always amused by these armchair Generals with opinions like this writer. If what they say is true, and it’s just so simple, and a tank and a platoon of marines can disarm a civilian populace, then what took so long in Vietnam, Iraq, etc???
If it’s so easy, why not just fix the troubles in Mexico next month? After all, no one with a gun would ever resist, right? lol
And as a live man I don't be concerned much about grammar. Sheesh!
Another reason this author is a fool: guns are good for armies and self-defense. However, any person educated in the hard sciences is FAR deadlier making and using weapons other than guns. After all, 7th century barbarians have figured out how to kill tanks. And they don’t know squat.
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.