- 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: Serious question for the AR, AK, SKS folks
Posted on 12/21/12 at 12:27 am to I Love Bama
Posted on 12/21/12 at 12:27 am to I Love Bama
quote:
You're not thinking clear. You think our own friends and family would take those orders to fire upon us? I
ok. let me back up a bit.
i dont think it will ever happen.. like I said we have a sane govt leadership that would never do that... I also said that if it ever did get to that point (the govt using its army against us) they would have the full attention of that army and basically get it to do what they desired.
my argument isn't if or if'nt they would do it... but if we could stand up to it if it happened... and frankly I am a good shot but i can't shoot an attack heli.
0
Posted on 12/21/12 at 12:29 am to m2pro
quote:
do you think Americans were excited about fighting King George and his LEGION of redcoats and cannons and artillery and money and resources?
we beat their asses with sling shots comparatively.
will and heart doesn't mean shite against planes and tanks... I know it makes you feel good to think that you could stand up against that as a people... but unfortunately i dont think we could.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 12:31 am to bryso
quote:
how did i go full retard? if anything i think its full retard to think we could stand up to a govt willing to use bombs, planes, and tanks against us.
Vietnam anyone?
quote:
will and heart doesn't mean shite against planes and tanks... I know it makes you feel good to think that you could stand up against that as a people... but unfortunately i dont think we could.
This post was edited on 12/21/12 at 12:32 am
Posted on 12/21/12 at 12:35 am to RATeamWannabe
quote:
Vietnam anyone?
sounds like it would be a good argument.. but we lost Vietnam because of the politics involved... when you don't know who you are fighting it is hard to fight them... if you blow things to shite you risk killing the innocent. The US didnt want to people the guy known for shooting everything that moved and salting the land..
If the US govt turns on its own people there will be no innocent people in their eyes... so it wont have to distinguish between army man and not army man... meaning it can go to town on enforcing its will
Posted on 12/21/12 at 12:40 am to bryso
Wont be much different here, dont you think?
They cant just shoot women and kids, even though women and kids will be shooting at them. There wouldnt be clearly defined battle lines, so everyone they see could be a potential enemy. And, its Americans against Americans. What could be more demoralizing to troops than fighting against their own kind?
Yea, we backed out of Vietnam because of politics. Guess why politicians backed them out...because there were dead soldiers coming home in body bags, even though they were using tanks, planes, and fully automatic weapons against farmers.
Destroy the enemy will to fight, they did it, they won
The government wont be doing this. Generals wont be carrying out orders. Troops on the ground have to do it, and troops on the ground wont always follow those orders in that scenario.
They cant just shoot women and kids, even though women and kids will be shooting at them. There wouldnt be clearly defined battle lines, so everyone they see could be a potential enemy. And, its Americans against Americans. What could be more demoralizing to troops than fighting against their own kind?
Yea, we backed out of Vietnam because of politics. Guess why politicians backed them out...because there were dead soldiers coming home in body bags, even though they were using tanks, planes, and fully automatic weapons against farmers.
Destroy the enemy will to fight, they did it, they won
quote:
If the US govt turns on its own people there will be no innocent people in their eyes... so it wont have to distinguish between army man and not army man... meaning it can go to town on enforcing its will
The government wont be doing this. Generals wont be carrying out orders. Troops on the ground have to do it, and troops on the ground wont always follow those orders in that scenario.
This post was edited on 12/21/12 at 12:42 am
Posted on 12/21/12 at 12:43 am to RATeamWannabe
quote:
They cant just shoot women and kids,
Do you really thing that a govt that has turned on its people gives a damn about women and kids?
I mean fricking honestly... if it gets to that point do you think they are going to play by "rules"
Posted on 12/21/12 at 12:46 am to bryso
The government doesnt pull the trigger dude. Troops do, and most wouldnt.
And if it came to that, then there would be no taking sides, then the lines are clear, and there are a lot more civilians in this country than military.
And if it came to that, then there would be no taking sides, then the lines are clear, and there are a lot more civilians in this country than military.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 12:47 am to RATeamWannabe
quote:
he government wont be doing this. Generals wont be carrying out orders. Troops on the ground have to do it, and troops on the ground wont always follow those orders in that scenario.
god bless america... how many times do i have to say this... if it ever gets to this hypothetical point the govt will have full control over army and it will tell them what to do...
of course if right now this very second barry obama picked up the phone and said... hey military go shoot some people in idaho.. so we can have some more power... they (the military) would look at him and say.. uh dude no.. now GTFO...
but if we get to the point where the govt has north korean type control we could potentially have an army that will do anything for its leadership.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 1:40 am to FelicianaTigerfan
Dogs barking bloody murder and me having to get up at 1:30 in the morning is enough for me to own one, but I brought my 870 with me to investigate instead. 
Btw, dog just had to dump and didn't wanna do it in his kennel.
Btw, dog just had to dump and didn't wanna do it in his kennel.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 1:41 am to bryso
Only way to tyranny in this country is through gun owners and the second amendment. Yet some folks think it's passe'.
The stupid half of the bell curve will always exist no matter what.
The stupid half of the bell curve will always exist no matter what.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 1:48 am to meauxjeaux2
There is not a weapon on the planet that in my hands would be dangerous to anyone else without them initiating it.
Which is why I can't fathom the 'why should you have sew in sew' weapon excuse.
Why not? I'm not a threat to anyone that doesn't try to take my life or the life of someone in front of me. So what does it matter what I choose to own and shoot? To you, that is.
Which is why I can't fathom the 'why should you have sew in sew' weapon excuse.
Why not? I'm not a threat to anyone that doesn't try to take my life or the life of someone in front of me. So what does it matter what I choose to own and shoot? To you, that is.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 1:58 am to bryso
quote:
how did i go full retard? if anything i think its full retard to think we could stand up to a govt willing to use bombs, planes, and tanks against us.
Yikes.
OK here's a little what if for ya.
What if, 100 grandma's spread across the USA made a facebook page where they all agreed that on a set date and time they would take cookies down to the closest federal government employee they could find then blow their brains out.
You know, kind of a 100 Grandma Flash Revolution kinda thing.
What would happen the next day at the federal buildings across the nation?
Nobody would go to work.
They could do it with 22 handguns.
Yeah, the Second Amendment is still, no matter what, more powerful than the federal government.
We aren't going to be fighting a war this time. No matter how much they'd like that. So you need to revise your ideas of what's possible.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 8:11 am to meauxjeaux2
quote:
Wouldn't hurt my feelings on bit if they did decide to make some types of weapons unavailable to the public though.
This thinking without realizing it may never stop is scary. Too many think this way. The problem is, what is next? It started with full auto, but it wont stop with AR's. Why the hell are people ready to hand over their rights is beyond me.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 8:21 am to Langston
Yea I don't really get it.
I don't want an AR/AK but I do like the fact that so many people own them. I love Switzerland's approach to this. You HAVE to own a combat style weapon.
ETA: It is a huge deterrent to foreign invasion.
I don't want an AR/AK but I do like the fact that so many people own them. I love Switzerland's approach to this. You HAVE to own a combat style weapon.
ETA: It is a huge deterrent to foreign invasion.
This post was edited on 12/21/12 at 8:22 am
Posted on 12/21/12 at 8:26 am to FelicianaTigerfan
Why does a person want nicer looking rims on their car? Why better tools, etc. Why does a kid with a BB gun want a pellet gun? they look awesome, they shoot well, and we can own them. They are an all purpose gun for hunting, plinking, nice round, lightweight, sturdy, easy to clean and maintain.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 8:27 am to meauxjeaux2
MJ2 - eat me!
Posted on 12/21/12 at 8:29 am to meauxjeaux2
MJ2 - I like guns. That's all there is to it!
Posted on 12/21/12 at 8:36 am to Boats n Hose
BnHs, People do the same thing with whatever they like. They accumulate better stuff as it rolls out. fisherman get the latest And best gear. Hunters the same. Bicyclists get the latest lightest neatest looking bike. Street bike riders get the Busa or GSXR. Kids do the same with gaming systems. Building an AR is wonderfully satisfying. Oh well, enough said.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 8:54 am to Yewkindewit
quote:To make themselves more effective at their trade or hobby. Can understand this as it relates to a gun but if they banned 1200 dollar ball peen hammers I'm sure the claw hammer and maul I have will work fine.
They may have low self esteem, attention starved, superficial, status symbolTerrible reason to buy a gun though
[quote]Why better tools, etc.
quote:Its an upgrade but kids are horrible at decision making
Why does a kid with a BB gun want a pellet gun?
quote:I understand that (all except looking great. Buying a gun for looks is dumb.) I guess I've always looked at guns as tools and not toys. I'm not against good guys having them but I just don't understand the mad rush to get one and more so the hording of them. To each their own
they look awesome, they shoot well, and we can own them. They are an all purpose gun for hunting, plinking, nice round, lightweight, sturdy, easy to clean and maintain.
Posted on 12/21/12 at 9:09 am to FelicianaTigerfan
quote:
I'm not against good guys having them but I just don't understand the mad rush to get one and more so the hording of them. To each their own
I bought 2. I had twin boys in august and want to give them each one when they are older. Im afraid I wouldnt be able to that later next year when I was planning on getting them and thats my only reason. Im not a prepper or think I can fight an army. Just a gift for my boys after they are grown. Love guns and the ones from my dad are my favorite.
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News