re: Question about the viability of the 2nd Amendment?

quote:

---

After Katrina, were there any Louisianians who refused to give up their arms when the police wanted them? If a policeman showed up at my house with a warrant to confiscate a gun(s), I'd give it to him and hope he doesn't know about the other ones I have.

---

quote:

---

After Katrina, were there any Louisianians who refused to give up their arms when the police wanted them? If a policeman showed up at my house with a warrant to confiscate a gun(s), I'd give it to him and hope he doesn't know about the other ones I have.

---

quote:

---

My cousin. They arrested him and searched his home for all his firearms.

---

quote:

---

Are we expecting an armed revolt anytime soon?

---

quote:

---

This is something I've thought about a lot actually. I am a veteran of the US Army Infantry, so I am familiar with Army tactics and all that. The American people would win, period. Here's why:
First, I've seen people quoting the 314 million people number for total population of America. That's misleading, do you expect every single person to fight? The infants, the elderly, the disabled, the pregnant women, the people who faint at the sight of blood? That said, let's say only one percent (thanks /u/CloudHazard) of the American population actually fights. That is 3,140,000 people. They still outnumber the military (going off /u/DXGypsy stats) numbers of 2,200,000. This 1% would be the cream of the crop of the American people's numbers. I would bet that the vast majority of this 1% would be veterans, hunters, gun enthusiasts, etc. This 1% could be armed just about as well as the actual military in a matter of days as I would assume gun store owners would open their doors to this militia.
Let's look at arming the militia a little more. Most of us veterans (at least the ones I know) have weapons in their homes. There are gun stores in every town that carry rifles and ammo. There are two Army reserve units in my town that have vehicles, ammo, supplies, and weapons like M240B's and Mk-19's. One is just down the street and I imagine the people would raid that place within hours of initial conflict. The other one is on a guarded NAS, but I bet we would get that one too. We might not hold it, but we would get in, frick things up so the military couldn't use it after we leave, and steal all the supplies. My guess is similar raids would happen across the country, giving the milita access to heavy weapons, if not planes, helicopters, and tanks/APC's.
The military would still outgun the militia. The militia would opt for guerilla tactics and melt into the shadows. Remember that many of the militia members would have served in Vietnam or OEF/OIF (any many smaller conflicts in between) and are familiar with guerilla warfare. On top of that, the militia is familiar with US military operations and knows just where to strike to inflict the maximum amount of damage in the most efficient way. From deployment tactics to FOB set ups, the militia has a huge advantage here. Also, the militia could organize a highly effective psych warfare campaign since many of them are veterans and know exactly which buttons to push to lower morale.
Sure, the military can start rooting out the militia by executing families on live TV, but I bet that would do more harm than good. I bet more people would join the militia than would surrender to save their families. The military knows that there is no hope if they incite the other 90% of the American population that are not currently active fighters.
While the military is trying to figure out who is combatant and who is not, while they are locating, arresting, and executing families, the militia is striking at critical places over and over. I think the militia would become fairly coordinated and organize a decent chian of command pretty quickly. Most of them are veterans after all, and it's just like riding a bike.
Now, say the military locates the militia command group in a specific area. They organize a strike force to go in and take them out. The strike force would probably be Rangers or SF or SEALs (or a mix) and you have to remember that these guys, as awesome as they are, come from all over the country. If the military is lucky, they might have a guy in the group who is from the general area of the assault. On the other hand, it is a good bet that the entire militia in that area is from that area and knows the area much better than the strike force would. Another advantage for the militia.
I could go on, but I think you might get the point. Even with 1% of the total US population fighting against 100% of the military, unless WMD's are given a green light, I just don't think the military can win.
Edit: Not to mention the fact that the American people are still breeding another generation of people who can fight. Unless the military starts its own breeding program, it becomes a matter of "Can the US military kill enough civilians to force a surrender before the civilians kill enough military members?" If the war drags out for an extended amount of time, the US military will eventually run out of people while the American people won't.

---

quote:

---

Rather quickly. Especially considering that the guerrilla fighters are familiar with the land.

---