Printable View
[QUOTE=General]The Military can't take down Al Qaeda for good, you think they'll be able to take down a large insurgency of Americans in their own country:oldlol:[/QUOTE]
Al Qaeda is made up of hardened cave-dwelling fanatics willing to die for their cause. The American 'insurgency' would be made up of obese McDonald's binging, reality TV watching gun club card holders. The uprising would be over once they realized they would miss the American Idol finale.
[QUOTE=DonDadda59]Al Qaeda is made up of hardened cave-dwelling fanatics willing to die for their cause. The American 'insurgency' would be made up of obese McDonald's binging, reality TV watching gun club card holders. The uprising would be over once they realized they would miss the American Idol finale.[/QUOTE]
Not only that, but Al Qaeda is able to operate through a campaign of fear, which keeps villagers quiet in third world countries. There is a reason they thrive in undeveloped, uneducated parts of the world where they are able to intimidate.
In this case, you would have a relatively tiny band of gun nuts whom the vast majority of the country would despise and actively work against. Even among gun nuts, only a tiny portion would attempt to partake in government overthrow to protect their assault rifles.
They would be decimated in a matter of days if they actually attempted something so grand, which they wouldn't because they are all talk.
[QUOTE=RedBlackAttack]Not only that, but Al Qaeda is able to operate through a campaign of fear, which keeps villagers quiet in third world countries. There is a reason they thrive in undeveloped, uneducated parts of the world where they are able to intimidate.
In this case, you would have a relatively tiny band of gun nuts whom the vast majority of the country would despise and actively work against. Even among gun nuts, only a tiny portion would attempt to partake in government overthrow to protect their assault rifles.
They would be decimated in a matter of days if they actually attempted something so grand, which they wouldn't because they are all talk.[/QUOTE]
In a nutshell :oldlol:
But don't tell that to the John Rambos here. Watch out 'tyranny', some ISH members have their six shooters and AR-15s ready to roll against the entire military complex.
[QUOTE=DonDadda59]In a nutshell :oldlol:
But don't tell that to the John Rambos here. Watch out 'tyranny', some ISH members have their six shooters and AR-15s ready to roll against the entire military complex.[/QUOTE]
:roll:
A theoretical civilian militia would benefit from any firearm advantage. As mentioned, Iraqi insurgents were able to resist the U.S. military despite being outgunned by Apaches, artillery and heavy armor. They actually have an advantage with infantry weapons like AK-47s, heavy machine guns, semi-auto sniper rifles, etc. Although the U.S. military can use weapons better suited for the task, they're just not standard issue now. Either way... a determined, well-armed opponent can make any military bleed, if the military doesn't engage in genocide. The Taliban and Iraqis demonstrated that well enough.
So it's not that fancy luxury weapons wouldn't be useful to U.S. militias. It's that the situation seems extremely unlikely. There's no cohesive, desperate population group in the U.S. that would coordinate to fight government forces, except some cartels like in Mexico. The people that want fancy machine guns want them for entertainment. They are more fun to shoot.
On a killing spree you're typically facing unarmed opponents. You can get celebrity status with a handgun if you choose the right situation. Virginia Tech only used a handgun. Sikh temple was just a handgun. If you want to shoot up a police station where every one of your targets has a handgun, only then do you really need an assault rifle.
[QUOTE=DonDadda59]In a nutshell :oldlol:
But don't tell that to the John Rambos here. Watch out 'tyranny', some ISH members have their six shooters and AR-15s ready to roll against the entire military complex.[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_mKgww2ohcsM/TEYEx9DKFkI/AAAAAAAAALM/hFUmnvLkk30/s1600/redneck6tc.jpg[/IMG]
Protectang dey property :pimp:
I love the idiotic argument that we shouldn't ban guns because if someone wanted to kill someone they'll do it some other way. Its no different then asking why do we have locks on our doors? If someone wanted to break into your home they could just break through your window anyway.
[QUOTE=BMOGEFan]lets just ban cars for everyone since there are drunk drivers and asian female drivers[/QUOTE]
cars serve a purpose that isn't killing or hurting people.
a gun's only purpose is to hurt or kill animals/people
Thread Date Comment
Feinstein to introduce... 12-18-2012 07:05 AM You're one of the most stupid people I've ever read on this board. I hope you and your family get shot in the next mass shooting.
whoever wrote this...you do know karma is a bitch. And things do tend to bite you in the ass.
[QUOTE=The Real JW]A theoretical civilian militia would benefit from any firearm advantage. As mentioned, Iraqi insurgents were able to resist the U.S. military despite being outgunned by Apaches, artillery and heavy armor. They actually have an advantage with infantry weapons like AK-47s, heavy machine guns, semi-auto sniper rifles, etc. Although the U.S. military can use weapons better suited for the task, they're just not standard issue now. Either way... a determined, well-armed opponent can make any military bleed, if the military doesn't engage in genocide. The Taliban and Iraqis demonstrated that well enough.
So it's not that fancy luxury weapons wouldn't be useful to U.S. militias. It's that the situation seems extremely unlikely. There's no cohesive, desperate population group in the U.S. that would coordinate to fight government forces, except some cartels like in Mexico. The people that want fancy machine guns want them for entertainment. They are more fun to shoot.
On a killing spree you're typically facing unarmed opponents. You can get celebrity status with a handgun if you choose the right situation. Virginia Tech only used a handgun. Sikh temple was just a handgun. If you want to shoot up a police station where every one of your targets has a handgun, only then do you really need an assault rifle.[/QUOTE]
They would only make the military bleed as much as the military was attempting to reduce civilian casualties.
[QUOTE=Sarcastic]They would only make the military bleed as much as the military was attempting to reduce civilian casualties.[/QUOTE]
Exactly. I also love how in one argument they are telling us how safe guns are, and in another they are telling us how useful and powerful they are for defending yourself against the military.
[QUOTE=General]The Military can't take down Al Qaeda for good, you think they'll be able to take down a large insurgency of Americans in their own country:oldlol:[/QUOTE]
Al Qaeda>>>>>>bunch of fat rednecks
A lot of Al Qaeda members have fought in actual wars in the middle east, they are battle hardened, fat rednecks on the other hand, are really good at Call of Duty Black Ops.:roll:
[QUOTE=guy]I love the idiotic argument that we shouldn't ban guns because if someone wanted to kill someone they'll do it some other way. Its no different then asking why do we have locks on our doors? If someone wanted to break into your home they could just break through your window anyway.[/QUOTE]
Exactly. They don't even think, they just grab anything they can to try to make an argument.
Oh.. a criminal is going to come after me regardless... so who cares if he has a gun or a knife.. I'm going to take my chances.
:facepalm
[IMG]http://i50.tinypic.com/2hnb1qq.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=TheMan]Al Qaeda>>>>>>bunch of fat rednecks
A lot of Al Qaeda members have fought in actual wars in the middle east, they are battle hardened, fat rednecks on the other hand, are really good at Call of Duty Black Ops.:roll:[/QUOTE]
I think they would have to go back to fighting WW1 armies to even have a chance at all. WW2 is probably where modern armies really take off from competing with civilians.
How would they stop this?
[IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Boeing_B-29_Superfortress.jpg[/IMG]
Let alone this.
[IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/47/B-2_Spirit_original.jpg/640px-B-2_Spirit_original.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=TheMan]Al Qaeda>>>>>>bunch of fat rednecks
A lot of Al Qaeda members have fought in actual wars in the middle east, they are battle hardened, fat rednecks on the other hand, are really good at Call of Duty Black Ops.:roll:[/QUOTE]
Fat rednecks?
[IMG]http://i40.tinypic.com/rvc3lw.jpg[/IMG]
Let's see your pics Studmaster Flex.
[QUOTE=bmulls]Fat rednecks?
Let's see your pics Studmaster Flex.[/QUOTE]
You really ARE compensating for something! We were just joshing, too. Hilarious! :lol
[QUOTE=bmulls]Fat rednecks?
[IMG]http://i40.tinypic.com/rvc3lw.jpg[/IMG]
Let's see your pics Studmaster Flex.[/QUOTE]
If that's you, impressive torso, congrats...all them muscles still won't help you against a drone missle:oldlol:
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/5mARU.png[/IMG]
vs this badass:
[IMG]http://www.standupamericaus.org/sua/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Al-Qaeda-Iraq-Baghdadi.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Droid101]You really ARE compensating for something! We were just joshing, too. Hilarious! :lol[/QUOTE]
Nice try, but I'm not gonna post dick pics
[QUOTE=bmulls][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/5mARU.png[/IMG]
vs this badass:
[IMG]http://www.standupamericaus.org/sua/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Al-Qaeda-Iraq-Baghdadi.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
bmulls, serious question, have you ever served in the military? Ever been in a war zone?
If you haven't, my money is on that Islamist dude:oldlol:
[QUOTE=bmulls][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/5mARU.png[/IMG]
vs this badass:
[IMG]http://www.standupamericaus.org/sua/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Al-Qaeda-Iraq-Baghdadi.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lw3w4fQSui1r5jtugo1_500.png[/IMG]
Let's see you do all that flexing while carrying a vest strapped with bombs as you get ready to blow yourself to bits for your cause. Then we'll compare the two.
well this got weird
[QUOTE=InspiredLebowski]well this got weird[/QUOTE]
I know, right? Some pants-wetting ***** started posting pictures of his bare chest (bro workout, NO LEGS BRO) to compensate for his small genitalia.
Weird. I'd close this thread Mr. ModMan.
[QUOTE=TheMan]bmulls, serious question, have you ever served in the military? Ever been in a war zone?[/QUOTE]
No, and I fully understand that it is impossible to be ready for something like that unless you have experienced it first hand. I have a profound respect for our soldiers. I just wanted to shut these phagg0t circle jerkers up sitting here acting like every gun owner is a fat Call of Duty playing dumbass American.
[QUOTE=bmulls]No, and I fully understand that it is impossible to be ready for something like that unless you have experienced it first hand. I have a profound respect for our soldiers. I just wanted to shut these phagg0t circle jerkers up sitting here acting like every gun owner is a fat Call of Duty playing dumbass American.[/QUOTE]
It is called hyperbole.
[QUOTE=bmulls]No, and I fully understand that it is impossible to be ready for something like that unless you have experienced it first hand. I have a profound respect for our soldiers. I just wanted to shut these phagg0t circle jerkers up sitting here acting like every gun owner is a fat Call of Duty playing dumbass American.[/QUOTE]
I understand, I exaggerated for effect...regardless, a battle between you and that Islamist terrorist you posted? No offense but I'm betting that guy is a cold blooded dude who wouldn't hesitate to put a slug in a college guy who's nevet shot at another person.
Islamist willing to die for his cause>>>muscle bound college kid with zero battle experience
[QUOTE=bmulls][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/5mARU.png[/IMG]
vs this badass:
[IMG]http://www.standupamericaus.org/sua/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Al-Qaeda-Iraq-Baghdadi.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
his ak-74 is a beautiful machine.
why can't these be sold in America
[QUOTE=bmulls]Fat rednecks?
[IMG]http://i40.tinypic.com/rvc3lw.jpg[/IMG]
Let's see your pics Studmaster Flex.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FONN-0uoTHI[/url]
[QUOTE=flipogb]cars serve a purpose that isn't killing or hurting people.
a gun's only purpose is to hurt or kill animals/people[/QUOTE]
Yet more people are killed by cars each year..
yeah this thread did get weird. i would put my money on the bearded guy with the ak for sure.
more people die to obesity than cars and guns combined then multiplied 20 times. lets make soda and fast food illegal while we are writing new laws.
[QUOTE=DonDadda59][B]You tryna put me in a communist death camp Obamer? [/B]
[IMG]http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/30698330.jpg[/IMG]
[B]Over mah dead body, you commie basterd. John Muthaf*ckin Rambo reporting for duty.[/B]
[IMG]http://tundratabloids.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/ObamaPointing.jpg[/IMG]
[B]Obama: Cancel that bitch.[/B]
[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZ-dNu5uOQc"]1 drone, 1 shot, 6 heavily armed insurgents down[/URL]
[IMG]http://fellowshipofminds.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/obama-king.jpg[/IMG]
A basic rundown for the idiots thinking they are going to take on the military with their guns :oldlol:[/QUOTE]
FYI, much of the military hate the government, even top brass. Especially the Marines.
[QUOTE=MJ23forever]FYI, much the military hate the government, even top brass. Especially the Marines.[/QUOTE]
Which defeats your own point in our hypothetical "government of America suppresses its own people"...if a dictatorship or oppressive government doesn't have a military behind them, they can't do shit.
[QUOTE=D-Rose]Which defeats your own point in our hypothetical "government of America suppresses its own people"...if a dictatorship or oppressive government doesn't have a military behind them, they can't do shit.[/QUOTE]
Look at Syria right now. It's rebels vs. the government, but many of the rebels are ex Syrian military. The government is infinitely better equipped with planes and tanks, but the rebels are still gaining ground every day.
[QUOTE=bmulls]Look at Syria right now. It's rebels vs. the government, but many of the rebels are ex Syrian military. The government is infinitely better equipped with planes and tanks, but the rebels are still gaining ground every day.[/QUOTE]
The rebels are equipped and trained mostly by organizations such as terrorist ones and Islamists, they are not merely common civilians such as we have in the West. I don't think the comparison is valid because the Syrian military is far inferior to the United States military, even in relative terms. The gap between military and civilian capabilities is far smaller in 3rd world countries.
The point overall is that the political structure of the United States along with the nature of the military pretty much makes turning on its people in this "Us vs. them" dream scenario as impossible. People need to stop hiding behind that facade, it truly isn't 1776 anymore. This country is the most sovereign in the world, no one dares an invasion and really ever has in modern times.
So much for the old cars kill more people than guns thing.
[URL="http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/gun-deaths-set-outstrip-car-fatalities-first-time-152632492.html"]Even more sickening is almost a thousand killed in mass murders in 4 years.[/URL]
[QUOTE=Rose]So much for the old cars kill more people than guns thing.
[URL="http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/gun-deaths-set-outstrip-car-fatalities-first-time-152632492.html"]Even more sickening is almost a thousand killed in mass murders in 4 years.[/URL][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]The CDC estimates that auto-related deaths--long on the decline as more motorists wear seat-belts and face harsher penalties for drunk driving--will fall to 32,000 in 2015. Deaths from firearms, [B]which include suicides[/B] and accidents, are estimated to rise to 33,000 over the same period.
Every day, 85 Americans are shot dead, about [B]53 of them in suicides[/B]. This figure is still lower than 1993's peak in gun deaths (37,666), but has risen significantly since firearm deaths reached a low in 2000 (28,393). The data goes back to 1979.[/QUOTE]
We gonna act like these people wouldn't kill themselves if they didn't have guns?
53/85 = 62% of gun deaths are suicides.
Besides which this is pure speculation anyway. 2015? lol
So now 774 = 1000?
Looks like you missed this too:
[QUOTE]Meanwhile, USA Today, which looked at FBI figures, reports that 774 people were killed between 2006 and 2010 by a mass killer, defined as a person who kills four or more people in one incident. The figures show that mass killers strike on average once every two weeks. [B]A third of the 156 mass killings did not involve firearms[/B], but rather fire, knife or other weapon. Almost all of the mass killers in those years were men, and their average age was 32. [B]The dozens of deaths caused by mass killers represented about 1 percent of all homicides between 2006 and 2010.[/B][/QUOTE]
You think people weren't gonna read the article?
:kobe:
[QUOTE=bmulls]We gonna act like these people wouldn't kill themselves if they didn't have guns?
[/QUOTE]
Not as many.
It's easy to press a button and die... if you have to actually sit there and slit your wrists (gruesome) or jump off a bridge or something, a lot less would happen.
[QUOTE=Droid101]Not as many.
It's easy to press a button and die... if you have to actually sit there and slit your wrists (gruesome) or jump off a bridge or something, a lot less would happen.[/QUOTE]
Swallow a handful of pills, turn your car on and shut the garage door, etc. Slitting your wrists and jumping off a bridge are not the only options here.
Anyways this is just more evidence that the bigger issue is mental health. Think about it for a second. More people use guns to kill [B]themselves[/B] each year than are used to kill other people.