- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Question about the viability of the 2nd Amendment?
Posted on 1/29/14 at 2:01 pm to BRgetthenet
Posted on 1/29/14 at 2:01 pm to BRgetthenet
quote:
They didn't produce a warrant. Nopd shot him with bean bags and threw him in jail for 4 days without access to counsel.
What happened? Does he have an arrest record now? Get his guns back?
0
Posted on 1/29/14 at 2:06 pm to Tigerlaff
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:
Five percent of this militia would be Federal agents.
Posted on 1/29/14 at 2:14 pm to Tigerlaff
That massive paragraph you are quoting is half wrong. A true insurgency does not seek to fight the opponent's military. If he does so it is only to tie down his resources and make him commit more of his forces to a certain area or effort. The real war will be nasty. It would be one of murder, assassination and terror. The easy "soft" targets will be struck. The logistics and support areas would be terrorized. The economy would be crippled. The government would be collapsed in less than a year. It would be a no win situation for the government. For everyone really.
Posted on 1/29/14 at 2:19 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
...The real war will be nasty. It would be one of murder, assassination and terror...
I agree with this...
Posted on 1/29/14 at 2:57 pm to Upperaltiger06
It seems like "Dueling Banjos" should start playing when you click on this thread.
Posted on 1/29/14 at 3:12 pm to 4LSU2
quote:I think you are forgetting that the British burned Washington, DC and Johnny Horton
Since the country was formed in 1776, no I'm not incorrect. There have not been ground troops on the ground in the US by another country in that time.
Posted on 1/29/14 at 3:14 pm to Upperaltiger06
quote:
quote:
How would this scenario play out?
SEE: Afghanistan
Also, see Ukraine, where the people are winning despite being armed with only Molotov cocktails, rocks, and fireworks.
You don't have to be able to defeat an "organized modern military", you just have to be able to make winning too costly for the state.
As long as the American people are armed and value their freedom, no state can take either the guns or the freedom.
We are currently losing our freedoms, and that is precisely because we don't value them enough.
Posted on 1/29/14 at 3:34 pm to uway
quote:
We are currently losing our freedoms, and that is precisely because we don't value them enough.
Future urbanization and the influence of the media to convince younger people that guns (and hunting) are bad pose more of a risk to the 2nd Amendment than an armed conflict.
Posted on 1/29/14 at 3:44 pm to Mr. Misanthrope
Johnny Horton is buried in a cemetery in Bossier City on Hwy 80 just down from LA Downs. My great grandparents and grandpa are buried around the corner from him. My great grandma picked that cemetery so she could "hear the ponies run" forever.
Posted on 1/29/14 at 4:08 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
That massive paragraph you are quoting is half wrong. A true insurgency does not seek to fight the opponent's military. If he does so it is only to tie down his resources and make him commit more of his forces to a certain area or effort. The real war will be nasty. It would be one of murder, assassination and terror. The easy "soft" targets will be struck. The logistics and support areas would be terrorized. The economy would be crippled. The government would be collapsed in less than a year. It would be a no win situation for the government. For everyone really.
It sounds like you might have seen some of this before
I always hate these hypothetical Qs, because people just don't understand how fricking terrible insurgencies are for EVERYONE. Not only are families and bystanders fair game, they are prime targets. It is these circumstances which breed the terrorism we so despise. At some point it always becomes the most effective option.
Posted on 1/29/14 at 4:24 pm to 4LSU2
Johnny Horton is one of the GREATS.
Posted on 1/29/14 at 4:31 pm to MrCarton
quote:
It sounds like you might have seen some of this before
Not bad for a dumb jarhead huh?
Posted on 1/29/14 at 4:37 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Not bad for a dumb jarhead huh?
Hardly dumb. I talk to guys all the time who "were there man", I rarely meet guys who understood what they saw "there". Even fewer who can relay the experience effectively. I think your posts combine critical thinking with experience. That is a pretty rare combination.
Posted on 1/29/14 at 4:40 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
A lot of the gun people are red and a lot of the non gun people are blue. All that has to happen is siege of the cities buy the red areas and let those in the cities kill each other off. After 2 months new elections and the blue has suddenly lost any voting advantage it had...
Posted on 1/29/14 at 4:42 pm to MrCarton
I consider that high praise coming rrom you.
TBH, I didn't have a clue what was happening while I was there. I was just another LCpl grunt doing my thing. But I've read and studied as I've moved up the ranks a little and apply that to my experience and that's the those are the conclusions I've come to.
TBH, I didn't have a clue what was happening while I was there. I was just another LCpl grunt doing my thing. But I've read and studied as I've moved up the ranks a little and apply that to my experience and that's the those are the conclusions I've come to.
Posted on 1/29/14 at 5:01 pm to wickowick
quote:
A lot of the gun people are red and a lot of the non gun people are blue. All that has to happen is siege of the cities buy the red areas and let those in the cities kill each other off. After 2 months new elections and the blue has suddenly lost any voting advantage it had...
Hell yeah bro let's just kill all the democrats!!!
:devil: :devil: :devil: :devil: :devil:Posted on 1/29/14 at 5:03 pm to kingbob
quote:
an armed populace of 100 million guerrilla fighters.
I like the implication here that a third of the nation is willing to run at a buzzsaw until it has been clogged with their bodies
Posted on 1/29/14 at 5:36 pm to Mid Iowa Tiger
quote:
Not once did someone go on record as saying "the ocean is really big" as a reason not to. If that were the case Pearl Harbor would not have happened
It's common sense. Outside of the US and the UK name a country which crossed an ocean to start a war in the last 50 years. The sheer logistics it would take to invade the US from any country other than Mexico or Canada is tremendous.
This post was edited on 1/29/14 at 5:37 pm
Posted on 1/29/14 at 5:54 pm to 4LSU2
quote:
There is a reason there hasn't ever been a country that has invaded the US. That reason is the 2nd Amendment.
Couldn't possibly have anything to do with two fricking oceans on both sides
And Britain torched D.C. in the War of 1812.
Posted on 1/29/14 at 6:11 pm to wickowick
quote:
A lot of the gun people are red and a lot of the non gun people are blue. All that has to happen is siege of the cities buy the red areas and let those in the cities kill each other off. After 2 months new elections and the blue has suddenly lost any voting advantage it had...
After all the fighting, errbody's just going to chill and have an election? Why not just knock out the transformers to their polling stations and interdict their supply of No. 2 pencils?
Page 4 of 5
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News