CDZ Are anti gunners serious when they say they will stop at 10 round magazines?

[Skull Pilot]

Different cultures, different conditions.

The only difference is they don't have some foolish idea that gun ownership is a "right". If they give you a gun at all, they've made sure you aren't a nut or a crook.

Melodrama, nothing more.

33,000 deaths.
75,000 injuries
400,000 gun crimes
270 BILLION in economic losses

Every Year.

"But the Founding Fathers said I can have me a gun!"

That's melodrama.

Well our Founders thought otherwise.

I doubt your $270 Billion number, and again you count suicides, which don't count.

Dead is dead

Their families count those deaths

Half of all suicides are committed without firearms.

and suicide is a choice not a crime.

Didn't say it was a crime, said it was dead

And it has nothing to do with guns

 

[2aguy]

So said the British crown in 1775. Guess King George got THAT one right. LOL. The fact of the matter is, in a guerilla combat situation, those defending(as "rebel" forces would be in the situation we are discussing) require far less firepower and personnel. Also, you may wish to do some reading on the realities here:
https://www.quora.com/Would-the-American-military-fire-on-its-own-citizens-if-ordered-to
The Psychological Reasons Why American Soldiers Would Fire On American Citizens
Successful guerrilla campaigns

• American Revolutionary War (1775–1783)
• Peninsular War in Spain (1808–1814)
• First Boer War (1880–1881)
• Greek War of Independence against the Ottoman Empire (1821–1830)
• Algerian War (1954–1962)
• Afghani Mujahideen against the USSR (1980–1989)
• Burma Campaign (1942–1945)
• Cuban Revolution (1956–1959)
• East Timor (1999)
• Kosovo Liberation Army (1992–1999)
• Eritrean War of Independence (1961–1991)
• Turkish Revolutionaries at Turkish War of Independence against partitioning of the Ottoman Empire by the Allies
• Arab Revolt (1916–1918)
• Haitian Revolution [57]
• Independence War in Latin America [58]
• Indonesian National Revolution
• Hezbollah in southern Lebanon (1982–2000)
• Philippines' during the Japanese occupation of World War II[59]
• Rhodesian Bush War (1972–1980)
• portions of the Wars of Scottish Independence; notably, actions led by Robert the Bruce (13th century – 14th century)
• Irish War of Independence (1919–1921); campaign organized by Michael Collins[60]
• First Indochina War (1946–1954)
• Vietnam War (1959–1975)
• Cambodian Civil War (1967–1975)
• Bangladesh Liberation War (1971)
• People's War in Nepal
• The Partisans of Yugoslavia
• China (Communists vs. Nationalists) (1946–1949)
• Nicaragua (1977–1979)
• Go ahead and read. Let us know what you learn...

Only an insane person might think there would ever be armed combat between our military and the general population. Our military equipment is a little more advanced than the blunderbusses that King George had.

The German's thought the same thing in the 1920s......and likely thought the same thing as they marched into the box cars going to the camps...

Yes, privately owned firearms did a great job thwarting a Blitzkreig

They did in Switzerland.....see, you have to be able to hold territory after you capture it.....and had Europe not disarmed their peoples......like the Swiss.....there would have been no way for Germany to hold that territory......they didn't invade Switzerland because the 435,000 civilians with military rifles made it impossible to hold...so they invaded everyone else...

LOL

Switzerland sold out to the Nazis to save themselves from invasion
Never could have survived a Blitzkreig

And yet the only country the nazis didn't invade was the one with 435,000 armed civilians with fully automatic military rifles.....

THE SWISS WERE PREPARED TO FIGHT FACISM TO THE BITTER END | FRONTLINE | PBS



That is why the Nazis despised Switzerland. Joseph Goebbels called Switzerland "this stinking little state" where "sentiment has turned very much against us." Adolf Hitler decided that "all the rubbish of small nations still existing in Europe must be liquidated," even if it meant he would later "be attacked as the 'Butcher of the Swiss.'"



The 1940 Nazi invasion plan, Operation Tannenbaum, was not executed, and SS Oberst Hermann Bohme's 1943 memorandum warned that an invasion of Switzerland would be too costly because every man was armed and trained to shoot. This did not stop the Gestapo from preparing lists of Swiss to be liquidated once the Nazis overran the country.



The other European nations were easily toppled and had little means to wage a partisan war against the occupation. Once their standing armies were defeated, the governments capitulated and the populaces were defenseless.



Only in Switzerland was the entire populace armed and prepared to wage a relentless guerrilla war against an invader. When the war began in 1939, Switzerland mobilized 435,000 citizen soldiers out of a population of 4.2 million. Production figures for Swiss service rifles, which had firepower equal to those of the Germans, demonstrate an ample supply of small arms. Swiss militiamen were instructed to disregard any alleged "official" surrender as enemy propaganda and, if necessary, to fight individually. This meant that a nation of sharpshooters would be sniping at German soldiers at long ranges from every mountain.



While neutral, Switzerland was prepared to fight a Nazi invasion to the end. The celebrated Swiss Gen. Henri Guisan developed the strategy known as defense du reduit--an initial opposition followed by a retreat into the Alps, where a relentless war to the death would be waged. Most Swiss strongly opposed Nazism. Death sentences were issued for fifth-column activities, and proclamations against anti-Semitism were passed at various official levels. There was no Holocaust on Swiss soil, something that can not be said for France, the Netherlands, Poland or most of Europe.

 

[2aguy]

So said the British crown in 1775. Guess King George got THAT one right. LOL. The fact of the matter is, in a guerilla combat situation, those defending(as "rebel" forces would be in the situation we are discussing) require far less firepower and personnel. Also, you may wish to do some reading on the realities here:
https://www.quora.com/Would-the-American-military-fire-on-its-own-citizens-if-ordered-to
The Psychological Reasons Why American Soldiers Would Fire On American Citizens
Successful guerrilla campaigns

• American Revolutionary War (1775–1783)
• Peninsular War in Spain (1808–1814)
• First Boer War (1880–1881)
• Greek War of Independence against the Ottoman Empire (1821–1830)
• Algerian War (1954–1962)
• Afghani Mujahideen against the USSR (1980–1989)
• Burma Campaign (1942–1945)
• Cuban Revolution (1956–1959)
• East Timor (1999)
• Kosovo Liberation Army (1992–1999)
• Eritrean War of Independence (1961–1991)
• Turkish Revolutionaries at Turkish War of Independence against partitioning of the Ottoman Empire by the Allies
• Arab Revolt (1916–1918)
• Haitian Revolution [57]
• Independence War in Latin America [58]
• Indonesian National Revolution
• Hezbollah in southern Lebanon (1982–2000)
• Philippines' during the Japanese occupation of World War II[59]
• Rhodesian Bush War (1972–1980)
• portions of the Wars of Scottish Independence; notably, actions led by Robert the Bruce (13th century – 14th century)
• Irish War of Independence (1919–1921); campaign organized by Michael Collins[60]
• First Indochina War (1946–1954)
• Vietnam War (1959–1975)
• Cambodian Civil War (1967–1975)
• Bangladesh Liberation War (1971)
• People's War in Nepal
• The Partisans of Yugoslavia
• China (Communists vs. Nationalists) (1946–1949)
• Nicaragua (1977–1979)
• Go ahead and read. Let us know what you learn...

Only an insane person might think there would ever be armed combat between our military and the general population. Our military equipment is a little more advanced than the blunderbusses that King George had.

The German's thought the same thing in the 1920s......and likely thought the same thing as they marched into the box cars going to the camps...

Sorry, but I don't know how to respond to something so irrational. If you actually believe the US will reenact the events of the holocaust, I suggest you seek counseling soon.

Then I guess you don't agree with all the NAZI comments...

Depends on what those comments might have been. Trump said the Nazis at Charlottsville were good people.

No, he didn't...he said the normal people there who weren't nazis, but didn't want the statues pulled down, were good people...but thanks for lying and showing us once again, that left wingers can't tell the truth.

 

[2aguy]

Well our Founders thought otherwise.

I doubt your $270 Billion number, and again you count suicides, which don't count.

Dead is dead

Their families count those deaths

They could have just as easily used another method.

Possible

ODing on pills takes a couple hours
A bullet takes a split second

Tell that to the Japanese, Chinese, and Koreans...they have higher suicide rates than we do.....and only criminals and cops can have guns in those countries...

Cultural

Give them all guns and their suicide rate would double

There suicide rates are already higher than ours......if they want to commit suicide they would be committing more suicide...

 

[Humorme]

Only an idiot would think a rad tag bunch of gun nuts would offer any problem for our military.

So said the British crown in 1775. Guess King George got THAT one right. LOL. The fact of the matter is, in a guerilla combat situation, those defending(as "rebel" forces would be in the situation we are discussing) require far less firepower and personnel. Also, you may wish to do some reading on the realities here:
https://www.quora.com/Would-the-American-military-fire-on-its-own-citizens-if-ordered-to
The Psychological Reasons Why American Soldiers Would Fire On American Citizens
Successful guerrilla campaigns

• American Revolutionary War (1775–1783)
• Peninsular War in Spain (1808–1814)
• First Boer War (1880–1881)
• Greek War of Independence against the Ottoman Empire (1821–1830)
• Algerian War (1954–1962)
• Afghani Mujahideen against the USSR (1980–1989)
• Burma Campaign (1942–1945)
• Cuban Revolution (1956–1959)
• East Timor (1999)
• Kosovo Liberation Army (1992–1999)
• Eritrean War of Independence (1961–1991)
• Turkish Revolutionaries at Turkish War of Independence against partitioning of the Ottoman Empire by the Allies
• Arab Revolt (1916–1918)
• Haitian Revolution [57]
• Independence War in Latin America [58]
• Indonesian National Revolution
• Hezbollah in southern Lebanon (1982–2000)
• Philippines' during the Japanese occupation of World War II[59]
• Rhodesian Bush War (1972–1980)
• portions of the Wars of Scottish Independence; notably, actions led by Robert the Bruce (13th century – 14th century)
• Irish War of Independence (1919–1921); campaign organized by Michael Collins[60]
• First Indochina War (1946–1954)
• Vietnam War (1959–1975)
• Cambodian Civil War (1967–1975)
• Bangladesh Liberation War (1971)
• People's War in Nepal
• The Partisans of Yugoslavia
• China (Communists vs. Nationalists) (1946–1949)
• Nicaragua (1977–1979)
• Go ahead and read. Let us know what you learn...

Only an insane person might think there would ever be armed combat between our military and the general population. Our military equipment is a little more advanced than the blunderbusses that King George had.

Only an insane person would not think that the people won't rise up against the government at some juncture.

The military is not the only people with advanced equipment, and, as Dick Marcinko (former U.S. Navy SEAL Commander) used to say, you might not be able to outsmart the technology, but you can always outsmart the men behind the technology.

Remember that the U.S. lost a war to a country that didn't own any high tech gadgetry. You have to take into account that America is a country with millions of firearms, hundreds of thousands of specially trained ex military, cops, spies, and technological experts that could wreak havoc on any military forces.

History proves that civil disorders are inevitable... even in the U.S.

 

[rightwinger]

Only an idiot would think a rad tag bunch of gun nuts would offer any problem for our military.

So said the British crown in 1775. Guess King George got THAT one right. LOL. The fact of the matter is, in a guerilla combat situation, those defending(as "rebel" forces would be in the situation we are discussing) require far less firepower and personnel. Also, you may wish to do some reading on the realities here:
https://www.quora.com/Would-the-American-military-fire-on-its-own-citizens-if-ordered-to
The Psychological Reasons Why American Soldiers Would Fire On American Citizens
Successful guerrilla campaigns

• American Revolutionary War (1775–1783)
• Peninsular War in Spain (1808–1814)
• First Boer War (1880–1881)
• Greek War of Independence against the Ottoman Empire (1821–1830)
• Algerian War (1954–1962)
• Afghani Mujahideen against the USSR (1980–1989)
• Burma Campaign (1942–1945)
• Cuban Revolution (1956–1959)
• East Timor (1999)
• Kosovo Liberation Army (1992–1999)
• Eritrean War of Independence (1961–1991)
• Turkish Revolutionaries at Turkish War of Independence against partitioning of the Ottoman Empire by the Allies
• Arab Revolt (1916–1918)
• Haitian Revolution [57]
• Independence War in Latin America [58]
• Indonesian National Revolution
• Hezbollah in southern Lebanon (1982–2000)
• Philippines' during the Japanese occupation of World War II[59]
• Rhodesian Bush War (1972–1980)
• portions of the Wars of Scottish Independence; notably, actions led by Robert the Bruce (13th century – 14th century)
• Irish War of Independence (1919–1921); campaign organized by Michael Collins[60]
• First Indochina War (1946–1954)
• Vietnam War (1959–1975)
• Cambodian Civil War (1967–1975)
• Bangladesh Liberation War (1971)
• People's War in Nepal
• The Partisans of Yugoslavia
• China (Communists vs. Nationalists) (1946–1949)
• Nicaragua (1977–1979)
• Go ahead and read. Let us know what you learn...

Only an insane person might think there would ever be armed combat between our military and the general population. Our military equipment is a little more advanced than the blunderbusses that King George had.

Only an insane person would not think that the people won't rise up against the government at some juncture.

The military is not the only people with advanced equipment, and, as Dick Marcinko (former U.S. Navy SEAL Commander) used to say, you might not be able to outsmart the technology, but you can always outsmart the men behind the technology.

Remember that the U.S. lost a war to a country that didn't own any high tech gadgetry. You have to take into account that America is a country with millions of firearms, hundreds of thousands of specially trained ex military, cops, spies, and technological experts that could wreak havoc on any military forces.

History proves that civil disorders are inevitable... even in the U.S.

We are talking Americans here
Americans are fat and lazy. Too content with their standard of living to rise in revolt.

If they did, they would be no match to a modern army. Fat, out-of shape rednecks against the most advanced Army in history

 

[Humorme]

Only an idiot would think a rad tag bunch of gun nuts would offer any problem for our military.

So said the British crown in 1775. Guess King George got THAT one right. LOL. The fact of the matter is, in a guerilla combat situation, those defending(as "rebel" forces would be in the situation we are discussing) require far less firepower and personnel. Also, you may wish to do some reading on the realities here:
https://www.quora.com/Would-the-American-military-fire-on-its-own-citizens-if-ordered-to
The Psychological Reasons Why American Soldiers Would Fire On American Citizens
Successful guerrilla campaigns

• American Revolutionary War (1775–1783)
• Peninsular War in Spain (1808–1814)
• First Boer War (1880–1881)
• Greek War of Independence against the Ottoman Empire (1821–1830)
• Algerian War (1954–1962)
• Afghani Mujahideen against the USSR (1980–1989)
• Burma Campaign (1942–1945)
• Cuban Revolution (1956–1959)
• East Timor (1999)
• Kosovo Liberation Army (1992–1999)
• Eritrean War of Independence (1961–1991)
• Turkish Revolutionaries at Turkish War of Independence against partitioning of the Ottoman Empire by the Allies
• Arab Revolt (1916–1918)
• Haitian Revolution [57]
• Independence War in Latin America [58]
• Indonesian National Revolution
• Hezbollah in southern Lebanon (1982–2000)
• Philippines' during the Japanese occupation of World War II[59]
• Rhodesian Bush War (1972–1980)
• portions of the Wars of Scottish Independence; notably, actions led by Robert the Bruce (13th century – 14th century)
• Irish War of Independence (1919–1921); campaign organized by Michael Collins[60]
• First Indochina War (1946–1954)
• Vietnam War (1959–1975)
• Cambodian Civil War (1967–1975)
• Bangladesh Liberation War (1971)
• People's War in Nepal
• The Partisans of Yugoslavia
• China (Communists vs. Nationalists) (1946–1949)
• Nicaragua (1977–1979)
• Go ahead and read. Let us know what you learn...

Only an insane person might think there would ever be armed combat between our military and the general population. Our military equipment is a little more advanced than the blunderbusses that King George had.

Only an insane person would not think that the people won't rise up against the government at some juncture.

The military is not the only people with advanced equipment, and, as Dick Marcinko (former U.S. Navy SEAL Commander) used to say, you might not be able to outsmart the technology, but you can always outsmart the men behind the technology.

Remember that the U.S. lost a war to a country that didn't own any high tech gadgetry. You have to take into account that America is a country with millions of firearms, hundreds of thousands of specially trained ex military, cops, spies, and technological experts that could wreak havoc on any military forces.

History proves that civil disorders are inevitable... even in the U.S.

We are talking Americans here
Americans are fat and lazy. Too content with their standard of living to rise in revolt.

If they did, they would be no match to a modern army. Fat, out-of shape rednecks against the most advanced Army in history

At one level, I would concede that you have a point. At the other end of the spectrum, Hollywood is portraying our U.S. military as a bunch of bearded drunks that are taking drugs, breaking the law, and fraternizing for the purposes of sex (see tv shows like Valor, The Brave and SEAL Team for examples.) I wonder how much of that stereotype is equally accurate as your stereotype.

I hope and pray that some Americans will wake up and see the effects that fast food, opioids, and wasting time on computers is doing to them. The terrorists we face are not like your average American which is why we cannot win over them. IF the American people took up the same lifestyle, it wouldn't take many to be a force against the tyranny of an all too powerful government.

 

[rightwinger]

Only an idiot would think a rad tag bunch of gun nuts would offer any problem for our military.

So said the British crown in 1775. Guess King George got THAT one right. LOL. The fact of the matter is, in a guerilla combat situation, those defending(as "rebel" forces would be in the situation we are discussing) require far less firepower and personnel. Also, you may wish to do some reading on the realities here:
https://www.quora.com/Would-the-American-military-fire-on-its-own-citizens-if-ordered-to
The Psychological Reasons Why American Soldiers Would Fire On American Citizens
Successful guerrilla campaigns

• American Revolutionary War (1775–1783)
• Peninsular War in Spain (1808–1814)
• First Boer War (1880–1881)
• Greek War of Independence against the Ottoman Empire (1821–1830)
• Algerian War (1954–1962)
• Afghani Mujahideen against the USSR (1980–1989)
• Burma Campaign (1942–1945)
• Cuban Revolution (1956–1959)
• East Timor (1999)
• Kosovo Liberation Army (1992–1999)
• Eritrean War of Independence (1961–1991)
• Turkish Revolutionaries at Turkish War of Independence against partitioning of the Ottoman Empire by the Allies
• Arab Revolt (1916–1918)
• Haitian Revolution [57]
• Independence War in Latin America [58]
• Indonesian National Revolution
• Hezbollah in southern Lebanon (1982–2000)
• Philippines' during the Japanese occupation of World War II[59]
• Rhodesian Bush War (1972–1980)
• portions of the Wars of Scottish Independence; notably, actions led by Robert the Bruce (13th century – 14th century)
• Irish War of Independence (1919–1921); campaign organized by Michael Collins[60]
• First Indochina War (1946–1954)
• Vietnam War (1959–1975)
• Cambodian Civil War (1967–1975)
• Bangladesh Liberation War (1971)
• People's War in Nepal
• The Partisans of Yugoslavia
• China (Communists vs. Nationalists) (1946–1949)
• Nicaragua (1977–1979)
• Go ahead and read. Let us know what you learn...

Only an insane person might think there would ever be armed combat between our military and the general population. Our military equipment is a little more advanced than the blunderbusses that King George had.

Only an insane person would not think that the people won't rise up against the government at some juncture.

The military is not the only people with advanced equipment, and, as Dick Marcinko (former U.S. Navy SEAL Commander) used to say, you might not be able to outsmart the technology, but you can always outsmart the men behind the technology.

Remember that the U.S. lost a war to a country that didn't own any high tech gadgetry. You have to take into account that America is a country with millions of firearms, hundreds of thousands of specially trained ex military, cops, spies, and technological experts that could wreak havoc on any military forces.

History proves that civil disorders are inevitable... even in the U.S.

We are talking Americans here
Americans are fat and lazy. Too content with their standard of living to rise in revolt.

If they did, they would be no match to a modern army. Fat, out-of shape rednecks against the most advanced Army in history

At one level, I would concede that you have a point. At the other end of the spectrum, Hollywood is portraying our U.S. military as a bunch of bearded drunks that are taking drugs, breaking the law, and fraternizing for the purposes of sex (see tv shows like Valor, The Brave and SEAL Team for examples.) I wonder how much of that stereotype is equally accurate as your stereotype.

I hope and pray that some Americans will wake up and see the effects that fast food, opioids, and wasting time on computers is doing to them. The terrorists we face are not like your average American which is why we cannot win over them. IF the American people took up the same lifestyle, it wouldn't take many to be a force against the tyranny of an all too powerful government.

Terrorists are an annoyance

They are no threat to our democracy

 

[Skull Pilot]

So said the British crown in 1775. Guess King George got THAT one right. LOL. The fact of the matter is, in a guerilla combat situation, those defending(as "rebel" forces would be in the situation we are discussing) require far less firepower and personnel. Also, you may wish to do some reading on the realities here:
https://www.quora.com/Would-the-American-military-fire-on-its-own-citizens-if-ordered-to
The Psychological Reasons Why American Soldiers Would Fire On American Citizens
Successful guerrilla campaigns

• American Revolutionary War (1775–1783)
• Peninsular War in Spain (1808–1814)
• First Boer War (1880–1881)
• Greek War of Independence against the Ottoman Empire (1821–1830)
• Algerian War (1954–1962)
• Afghani Mujahideen against the USSR (1980–1989)
• Burma Campaign (1942–1945)
• Cuban Revolution (1956–1959)
• East Timor (1999)
• Kosovo Liberation Army (1992–1999)
• Eritrean War of Independence (1961–1991)
• Turkish Revolutionaries at Turkish War of Independence against partitioning of the Ottoman Empire by the Allies
• Arab Revolt (1916–1918)
• Haitian Revolution [57]
• Independence War in Latin America [58]
• Indonesian National Revolution
• Hezbollah in southern Lebanon (1982–2000)
• Philippines' during the Japanese occupation of World War II[59]
• Rhodesian Bush War (1972–1980)
• portions of the Wars of Scottish Independence; notably, actions led by Robert the Bruce (13th century – 14th century)
• Irish War of Independence (1919–1921); campaign organized by Michael Collins[60]
• First Indochina War (1946–1954)
• Vietnam War (1959–1975)
• Cambodian Civil War (1967–1975)
• Bangladesh Liberation War (1971)
• People's War in Nepal
• The Partisans of Yugoslavia
• China (Communists vs. Nationalists) (1946–1949)
• Nicaragua (1977–1979)
• Go ahead and read. Let us know what you learn...

Only an insane person might think there would ever be armed combat between our military and the general population. Our military equipment is a little more advanced than the blunderbusses that King George had.

Only an insane person would not think that the people won't rise up against the government at some juncture.

The military is not the only people with advanced equipment, and, as Dick Marcinko (former U.S. Navy SEAL Commander) used to say, you might not be able to outsmart the technology, but you can always outsmart the men behind the technology.

Remember that the U.S. lost a war to a country that didn't own any high tech gadgetry. You have to take into account that America is a country with millions of firearms, hundreds of thousands of specially trained ex military, cops, spies, and technological experts that could wreak havoc on any military forces.

History proves that civil disorders are inevitable... even in the U.S.

We are talking Americans here
Americans are fat and lazy. Too content with their standard of living to rise in revolt.

If they did, they would be no match to a modern army. Fat, out-of shape rednecks against the most advanced Army in history

At one level, I would concede that you have a point. At the other end of the spectrum, Hollywood is portraying our U.S. military as a bunch of bearded drunks that are taking drugs, breaking the law, and fraternizing for the purposes of sex (see tv shows like Valor, The Brave and SEAL Team for examples.) I wonder how much of that stereotype is equally accurate as your stereotype.

I hope and pray that some Americans will wake up and see the effects that fast food, opioids, and wasting time on computers is doing to them. The terrorists we face are not like your average American which is why we cannot win over them. IF the American people took up the same lifestyle, it wouldn't take many to be a force against the tyranny of an all too powerful government.

Terrorists are an annoyance

They are no threat to our democracy

Correct

We are the biggest threat to our own republic.

The more people insist on minimizing the importance of individual rights the more our republic is in danger

 

[martybegan]

Different cultures, different conditions.

The only difference is they don't have some foolish idea that gun ownership is a "right". If they give you a gun at all, they've made sure you aren't a nut or a crook.

Melodrama, nothing more.

33,000 deaths.
75,000 injuries
400,000 gun crimes
270 BILLION in economic losses

Every Year.

"But the Founding Fathers said I can have me a gun!"

That's melodrama.

Well our Founders thought otherwise.

I doubt your $270 Billion number, and again you count suicides, which don't count.

Dead is dead

Their families count those deaths

They could have just as easily used another method.

Possible

ODing on pills takes a couple hours
A bullet takes a split second

Jumping of a bridge is just as quick.

 

[rightwinger]

The only difference is they don't have some foolish idea that gun ownership is a "right". If they give you a gun at all, they've made sure you aren't a nut or a crook.

33,000 deaths.
75,000 injuries
400,000 gun crimes
270 BILLION in economic losses

Every Year.

"But the Founding Fathers said I can have me a gun!"

That's melodrama.

Well our Founders thought otherwise.

I doubt your $270 Billion number, and again you count suicides, which don't count.

Dead is dead

Their families count those deaths

They could have just as easily used another method.

Possible

ODing on pills takes a couple hours
A bullet takes a split second

Jumping of a bridge is just as quick.

There is never a bridge around when you need one

 

[martybegan]

Well our Founders thought otherwise.

I doubt your $270 Billion number, and again you count suicides, which don't count.

Dead is dead

Their families count those deaths

They could have just as easily used another method.

Possible

ODing on pills takes a couple hours
A bullet takes a split second

Jumping of a bridge is just as quick.

There is never a bridge around when you need one

I live in NYC, there is ALWAYS a bridge around.

 

[Humorme]

So said the British crown in 1775. Guess King George got THAT one right. LOL. The fact of the matter is, in a guerilla combat situation, those defending(as "rebel" forces would be in the situation we are discussing) require far less firepower and personnel. Also, you may wish to do some reading on the realities here:
https://www.quora.com/Would-the-American-military-fire-on-its-own-citizens-if-ordered-to
The Psychological Reasons Why American Soldiers Would Fire On American Citizens
Successful guerrilla campaigns

• American Revolutionary War (1775–1783)
• Peninsular War in Spain (1808–1814)
• First Boer War (1880–1881)
• Greek War of Independence against the Ottoman Empire (1821–1830)
• Algerian War (1954–1962)
• Afghani Mujahideen against the USSR (1980–1989)
• Burma Campaign (1942–1945)
• Cuban Revolution (1956–1959)
• East Timor (1999)
• Kosovo Liberation Army (1992–1999)
• Eritrean War of Independence (1961–1991)
• Turkish Revolutionaries at Turkish War of Independence against partitioning of the Ottoman Empire by the Allies
• Arab Revolt (1916–1918)
• Haitian Revolution [57]
• Independence War in Latin America [58]
• Indonesian National Revolution
• Hezbollah in southern Lebanon (1982–2000)
• Philippines' during the Japanese occupation of World War II[59]
• Rhodesian Bush War (1972–1980)
• portions of the Wars of Scottish Independence; notably, actions led by Robert the Bruce (13th century – 14th century)
• Irish War of Independence (1919–1921); campaign organized by Michael Collins[60]
• First Indochina War (1946–1954)
• Vietnam War (1959–1975)
• Cambodian Civil War (1967–1975)
• Bangladesh Liberation War (1971)
• People's War in Nepal
• The Partisans of Yugoslavia
• China (Communists vs. Nationalists) (1946–1949)
• Nicaragua (1977–1979)
• Go ahead and read. Let us know what you learn...

Only an insane person might think there would ever be armed combat between our military and the general population. Our military equipment is a little more advanced than the blunderbusses that King George had.

Only an insane person would not think that the people won't rise up against the government at some juncture.

The military is not the only people with advanced equipment, and, as Dick Marcinko (former U.S. Navy SEAL Commander) used to say, you might not be able to outsmart the technology, but you can always outsmart the men behind the technology.

Remember that the U.S. lost a war to a country that didn't own any high tech gadgetry. You have to take into account that America is a country with millions of firearms, hundreds of thousands of specially trained ex military, cops, spies, and technological experts that could wreak havoc on any military forces.

History proves that civil disorders are inevitable... even in the U.S.

We are talking Americans here
Americans are fat and lazy. Too content with their standard of living to rise in revolt.

If they did, they would be no match to a modern army. Fat, out-of shape rednecks against the most advanced Army in history

At one level, I would concede that you have a point. At the other end of the spectrum, Hollywood is portraying our U.S. military as a bunch of bearded drunks that are taking drugs, breaking the law, and fraternizing for the purposes of sex (see tv shows like Valor, The Brave and SEAL Team for examples.) I wonder how much of that stereotype is equally accurate as your stereotype.

I hope and pray that some Americans will wake up and see the effects that fast food, opioids, and wasting time on computers is doing to them. The terrorists we face are not like your average American which is why we cannot win over them. IF the American people took up the same lifestyle, it wouldn't take many to be a force against the tyranny of an all too powerful government.

Terrorists are an annoyance

They are no threat to our democracy

You should try telling the victims of terrorism that they are no threat. I don't recognize a democracy. I was guaranteed a Republican form of Government (Article 4 Sec. 4 of the Constitution.)

 

[rightwinger]

Only an insane person might think there would ever be armed combat between our military and the general population. Our military equipment is a little more advanced than the blunderbusses that King George had.

Only an insane person would not think that the people won't rise up against the government at some juncture.

The military is not the only people with advanced equipment, and, as Dick Marcinko (former U.S. Navy SEAL Commander) used to say, you might not be able to outsmart the technology, but you can always outsmart the men behind the technology.

Remember that the U.S. lost a war to a country that didn't own any high tech gadgetry. You have to take into account that America is a country with millions of firearms, hundreds of thousands of specially trained ex military, cops, spies, and technological experts that could wreak havoc on any military forces.

History proves that civil disorders are inevitable... even in the U.S.

We are talking Americans here
Americans are fat and lazy. Too content with their standard of living to rise in revolt.

If they did, they would be no match to a modern army. Fat, out-of shape rednecks against the most advanced Army in history

At one level, I would concede that you have a point. At the other end of the spectrum, Hollywood is portraying our U.S. military as a bunch of bearded drunks that are taking drugs, breaking the law, and fraternizing for the purposes of sex (see tv shows like Valor, The Brave and SEAL Team for examples.) I wonder how much of that stereotype is equally accurate as your stereotype.

I hope and pray that some Americans will wake up and see the effects that fast food, opioids, and wasting time on computers is doing to them. The terrorists we face are not like your average American which is why we cannot win over them. IF the American people took up the same lifestyle, it wouldn't take many to be a force against the tyranny of an all too powerful government.

Terrorists are an annoyance

They are no threat to our democracy

You should try telling the victims of terrorism that they are no threat. I don't recognize a democracy. I was guaranteed a Republican form of Government (Article 4 Sec. 4 of the Constitution.)

Terrorists will always be among us
But how much damage do they actually inflict on our society?

Less than 100 deaths last year from terror attacks. We have over 8000 murders a year. Gang violence is a bigger threat than terrorism

 

[Skull Pilot]

Only an insane person would not think that the people won't rise up against the government at some juncture.

The military is not the only people with advanced equipment, and, as Dick Marcinko (former U.S. Navy SEAL Commander) used to say, you might not be able to outsmart the technology, but you can always outsmart the men behind the technology.

Remember that the U.S. lost a war to a country that didn't own any high tech gadgetry. You have to take into account that America is a country with millions of firearms, hundreds of thousands of specially trained ex military, cops, spies, and technological experts that could wreak havoc on any military forces.

History proves that civil disorders are inevitable... even in the U.S.

We are talking Americans here
Americans are fat and lazy. Too content with their standard of living to rise in revolt.

If they did, they would be no match to a modern army. Fat, out-of shape rednecks against the most advanced Army in history

At one level, I would concede that you have a point. At the other end of the spectrum, Hollywood is portraying our U.S. military as a bunch of bearded drunks that are taking drugs, breaking the law, and fraternizing for the purposes of sex (see tv shows like Valor, The Brave and SEAL Team for examples.) I wonder how much of that stereotype is equally accurate as your stereotype.

I hope and pray that some Americans will wake up and see the effects that fast food, opioids, and wasting time on computers is doing to them. The terrorists we face are not like your average American which is why we cannot win over them. IF the American people took up the same lifestyle, it wouldn't take many to be a force against the tyranny of an all too powerful government.

Terrorists are an annoyance

They are no threat to our democracy

You should try telling the victims of terrorism that they are no threat. I don't recognize a democracy. I was guaranteed a Republican form of Government (Article 4 Sec. 4 of the Constitution.)

Terrorists will always be among us
But how much damage do they actually inflict on our society?

Less than 100 deaths last year from terror attacks. We have over 8000 murders a year. Gang violence is a bigger threat than terrorism

and gang violence isn't that big of a threat since it's mostly pieces of shit criminals killing other pieces of shit criminals

 

[rightwinger]

We are talking Americans here
Americans are fat and lazy. Too content with their standard of living to rise in revolt.

If they did, they would be no match to a modern army. Fat, out-of shape rednecks against the most advanced Army in history

At one level, I would concede that you have a point. At the other end of the spectrum, Hollywood is portraying our U.S. military as a bunch of bearded drunks that are taking drugs, breaking the law, and fraternizing for the purposes of sex (see tv shows like Valor, The Brave and SEAL Team for examples.) I wonder how much of that stereotype is equally accurate as your stereotype.

I hope and pray that some Americans will wake up and see the effects that fast food, opioids, and wasting time on computers is doing to them. The terrorists we face are not like your average American which is why we cannot win over them. IF the American people took up the same lifestyle, it wouldn't take many to be a force against the tyranny of an all too powerful government.

Terrorists are an annoyance

They are no threat to our democracy

You should try telling the victims of terrorism that they are no threat. I don't recognize a democracy. I was guaranteed a Republican form of Government (Article 4 Sec. 4 of the Constitution.)

Terrorists will always be among us
But how much damage do they actually inflict on our society?

Less than 100 deaths last year from terror attacks. We have over 8000 murders a year. Gang violence is a bigger threat than terrorism

and gang violence isn't that big of a threat since it's mostly pieces of shit criminals killing other pieces of shit criminals

But they also terrorize the honest citizens/businesses in the communities they reside in

Our internal gangs are a bigger threat than outside terrorists. If we spent as much money fighting gangs as we do fighting terrorist, we would be much safer

 

[Skull Pilot]

At one level, I would concede that you have a point. At the other end of the spectrum, Hollywood is portraying our U.S. military as a bunch of bearded drunks that are taking drugs, breaking the law, and fraternizing for the purposes of sex (see tv shows like Valor, The Brave and SEAL Team for examples.) I wonder how much of that stereotype is equally accurate as your stereotype.

I hope and pray that some Americans will wake up and see the effects that fast food, opioids, and wasting time on computers is doing to them. The terrorists we face are not like your average American which is why we cannot win over them. IF the American people took up the same lifestyle, it wouldn't take many to be a force against the tyranny of an all too powerful government.

Terrorists are an annoyance

They are no threat to our democracy

You should try telling the victims of terrorism that they are no threat. I don't recognize a democracy. I was guaranteed a Republican form of Government (Article 4 Sec. 4 of the Constitution.)

Terrorists will always be among us
But how much damage do they actually inflict on our society?

Less than 100 deaths last year from terror attacks. We have over 8000 murders a year. Gang violence is a bigger threat than terrorism

and gang violence isn't that big of a threat since it's mostly pieces of shit criminals killing other pieces of shit criminals

But they also terrorize the honest citizens/businesses in the communities they reside in

Our internal gangs are a bigger threat than outside terrorists. If we spent as much money fighting gangs as we do fighting terrorist, we would be much safer

gangs and gang crime are local issues not federal

 

[Humorme]

Only an insane person would not think that the people won't rise up against the government at some juncture.

The military is not the only people with advanced equipment, and, as Dick Marcinko (former U.S. Navy SEAL Commander) used to say, you might not be able to outsmart the technology, but you can always outsmart the men behind the technology.

Remember that the U.S. lost a war to a country that didn't own any high tech gadgetry. You have to take into account that America is a country with millions of firearms, hundreds of thousands of specially trained ex military, cops, spies, and technological experts that could wreak havoc on any military forces.

History proves that civil disorders are inevitable... even in the U.S.

We are talking Americans here
Americans are fat and lazy. Too content with their standard of living to rise in revolt.

If they did, they would be no match to a modern army. Fat, out-of shape rednecks against the most advanced Army in history

At one level, I would concede that you have a point. At the other end of the spectrum, Hollywood is portraying our U.S. military as a bunch of bearded drunks that are taking drugs, breaking the law, and fraternizing for the purposes of sex (see tv shows like Valor, The Brave and SEAL Team for examples.) I wonder how much of that stereotype is equally accurate as your stereotype.

I hope and pray that some Americans will wake up and see the effects that fast food, opioids, and wasting time on computers is doing to them. The terrorists we face are not like your average American which is why we cannot win over them. IF the American people took up the same lifestyle, it wouldn't take many to be a force against the tyranny of an all too powerful government.

Terrorists are an annoyance

They are no threat to our democracy

You should try telling the victims of terrorism that they are no threat. I don't recognize a democracy. I was guaranteed a Republican form of Government (Article 4 Sec. 4 of the Constitution.)

Terrorists will always be among us
But how much damage do they actually inflict on our society?

Less than 100 deaths last year from terror attacks. We have over 8000 murders a year. Gang violence is a bigger threat than terrorism

Just because the media and the FBI are telling you that the Las Vegas shooter was not a terrorist does not mean they got it right. They don't know what caused him to do the deed.

 

[Humorme]

At one level, I would concede that you have a point. At the other end of the spectrum, Hollywood is portraying our U.S. military as a bunch of bearded drunks that are taking drugs, breaking the law, and fraternizing for the purposes of sex (see tv shows like Valor, The Brave and SEAL Team for examples.) I wonder how much of that stereotype is equally accurate as your stereotype.

I hope and pray that some Americans will wake up and see the effects that fast food, opioids, and wasting time on computers is doing to them. The terrorists we face are not like your average American which is why we cannot win over them. IF the American people took up the same lifestyle, it wouldn't take many to be a force against the tyranny of an all too powerful government.

Terrorists are an annoyance

They are no threat to our democracy

You should try telling the victims of terrorism that they are no threat. I don't recognize a democracy. I was guaranteed a Republican form of Government (Article 4 Sec. 4 of the Constitution.)

Terrorists will always be among us
But how much damage do they actually inflict on our society?

Less than 100 deaths last year from terror attacks. We have over 8000 murders a year. Gang violence is a bigger threat than terrorism

and gang violence isn't that big of a threat since it's mostly pieces of shit criminals killing other pieces of shit criminals

But they also terrorize the honest citizens/businesses in the communities they reside in

Our internal gangs are a bigger threat than outside terrorists. If we spent as much money fighting gangs as we do fighting terrorist, we would be much safer

Virtually all mass shootings involve people on a schedule of drugs called SSRIs and / or political jihadists. Drugs, alcohol and mental health issues are as prevalent in gun violence as the weapons themselves. Even anti-gun sites attest to this:

Alcohol abuse/dependence also appears to have a causal association with the perpetration of violent and impulsive crime, including assault, use of a weapon, theft, property damage, and fraud (Boden et al., 2013). Significant associations have additionally been found between substance use disorders and making threats against others with a firearm (Casiano, et al., 2008). In addition, consumption of alcohol and drugs increases the risk one will become a victim of a violent crime. In a study that included medical examiner reports from King County, WA, alcohol and illicit drug use appeared to be 3 associated with an increased risk of violent death, including by firearms (Rivara et al., 2009). Among a studied population of homicide victims in Sao Paulo, alcohol consumption was positively correlated with homicide victimization, with firearms causing 78.6% of the deaths examined overall (Andreuccetti et al., 2009). Illicit drugs were prominent among the victims of firearms-related homicides in a study in Australia, with the relative levels of psychostimulants (especially cocaine) in such cases twice as high as that seen in deaths due to other causes. In contract, alcohol was most frequently seen amongst deaths due to blunt force injury (Darke & Duflou, 2008). Heavy drinkers in one study were found to be 2.67 times as likely to be shot in an assault compared to both lightdrinkers and non-drinkers (light- and non-drinkers shared the same risk). That same study found that simply being in an area of high off-premise alcohol outlet availability (“off-premise” meaning take-out establishments such as liquor and convenience stores) doubled a person’s risk of being shot in an assault. Heavy drinkers in high off-premise alcohol outlet availability areas were 9.34 times as likely to be shot in an assault. (Branas et al., 2009) A nationwide Swedish study using outpatient and inpatient data found that people with mental illness who also have a substance use disorder are nine times more likely than the general population to be murdered. Overall, people with mental illness were almost five times as likely to be a murder victim, compared with those with no psychiatric diagnosis. (Crump et al, 2013)

http://adai.uw.edu/pubs/infobriefs/ADAI-IB-2013-01.pdf

Seems to me we should focus on those issues, not the guns themselves.

 

[rightwinger]

Only an insane person might think there would ever be armed combat between our military and the general population. Our military equipment is a little more advanced than the blunderbusses that King George had.

The German's thought the same thing in the 1920s......and likely thought the same thing as they marched into the box cars going to the camps...

Yes, privately owned firearms did a great job thwarting a Blitzkreig

They did in Switzerland.....see, you have to be able to hold territory after you capture it.....and had Europe not disarmed their peoples......like the Swiss.....there would have been no way for Germany to hold that territory......they didn't invade Switzerland because the 435,000 civilians with military rifles made it impossible to hold...so they invaded everyone else...

LOL

Switzerland sold out to the Nazis to save themselves from invasion
Never could have survived a Blitzkreig

And yet the only country the nazis didn't invade was the one with 435,000 armed civilians with fully automatic military rifles.....

THE SWISS WERE PREPARED TO FIGHT FACISM TO THE BITTER END | FRONTLINE | PBS



That is why the Nazis despised Switzerland. Joseph Goebbels called Switzerland "this stinking little state" where "sentiment has turned very much against us." Adolf Hitler decided that "all the rubbish of small nations still existing in Europe must be liquidated," even if it meant he would later "be attacked as the 'Butcher of the Swiss.'"



The 1940 Nazi invasion plan, Operation Tannenbaum, was not executed, and SS Oberst Hermann Bohme's 1943 memorandum warned that an invasion of Switzerland would be too costly because every man was armed and trained to shoot. This did not stop the Gestapo from preparing lists of Swiss to be liquidated once the Nazis overran the country.



The other European nations were easily toppled and had little means to wage a partisan war against the occupation. Once their standing armies were defeated, the governments capitulated and the populaces were defenseless.



Only in Switzerland was the entire populace armed and prepared to wage a relentless guerrilla war against an invader. When the war began in 1939, Switzerland mobilized 435,000 citizen soldiers out of a population of 4.2 million. Production figures for Swiss service rifles, which had firepower equal to those of the Germans, demonstrate an ample supply of small arms. Swiss militiamen were instructed to disregard any alleged "official" surrender as enemy propaganda and, if necessary, to fight individually. This meant that a nation of sharpshooters would be sniping at German soldiers at long ranges from every mountain.



While neutral, Switzerland was prepared to fight a Nazi invasion to the end. The celebrated Swiss Gen. Henri Guisan developed the strategy known as defense du reduit--an initial opposition followed by a retreat into the Alps, where a relentless war to the death would be waged. Most Swiss strongly opposed Nazism. Death sentences were issued for fifth-column activities, and proclamations against anti-Semitism were passed at various official levels. There was no Holocaust on Swiss soil, something that can not be said for France, the Netherlands, Poland or most of Europe.

Switzerland could not defend themselves with small arms

If Hitler was intent on taking Switzerland (which he didn't need), he could have leveled the cities, destroyed the railways, cut off their distribution of food

Any gun owner acting as a sniper would be publically tortured along with his family and neighbors

Wisely, Switzerland chose to appease Hitler