2nd Amendment can't win against tanks and choppers etc

[philadelphia patriot]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i8a3gjt_Ar0

[fallenleader]

In a book I read, this was talked about. The author used the terrorist group the IRA as an example. The British have been trying to get rid of them for years. There aren't many members and they all live on an island. They are still in operation. Imagine a group with hopefully 9 million members in the USA. That's only 3% which was all it took to defeat England. A war with people battling the US army is delusional but that wouldn't be how to fight it. Several events have paralyzed parts of our country over the years. The two biggest in recent history only had 3 people involved. The D.C. sniper all but shut down parts of Virginia and D.C. I was living there at the time. People were terrified. Kids weren't allowed out for recess. Millions of dollars and thousands of man hours were spent trying to catch those two animals. Next was that Austin bomber. I'm sure the entire city lived in fear until he was caught. Imagine these types of actions directed at law enforcement and the government undertaken by millions. Attacks on infrastructure, power grids, water supplies, oil refineries. This would break the will of the government and its supporters pretty quickly. Marching down the streets with firearms is for idiots. That is how I envision the second amendment standing up to Tyranny.

this is exactly it. it will be the most brutal and horrific conflict recent history has seen. that is why it is not arbitrarily kicked off.
and attacking infrastructure from within is something America has not planned for, as all threats have from from abroad.

That's one big plus for military service - the military isn't one big Marxist indoctrination camp, like our colleges have become. yet.

fify, they are pushing to let the lefty transgenders in to help break the system up.

they also assume that drone strikes and tanks etc will be accepted on American streets, we cant use them in foreign countries without being called babykillers etc. the rules of engagement wouldnt allow the govt to win.

they were used against miners in the past, the police forces have used dropped explosives against targets before as well.
don't make assumptions that the hypocritical left would hesitate to support the attacks against what they've been told are nazi's.
they'd sacrifice their own blood to eliminate what they perceive to be a threat.

you take the fight into their cities where they wont risk killing themselves.

precisely. take it right into the heart of the cities where tanks and aircraft will be of little use without massive collateral damage.

we've been fighting in the sandbox for two decades. there are always ways to acquire arms, they do a pretty decent job against all our hardware although ROE plays a role in that.

[HarmonyHermit]

History has shown us many times that a major army can be defeated by poorly equipped insurgents. When the American War between the States Started, many members of the US Army's Officer corps resigned to join the Confederacy leaving a leadership vacuum that took years to fill. And the Confederacy was defeated because it was a physical part of the country that gave the Union something to blockade and attack. A civil war of the people in all 50 states will be something completely different. No fixed land to conquer and hold, nothing to blockade, ex military on the rebels side and everywhere. Sabotage of facilities and equipment by rebels and attacks on government facilities and people.

Korea. When the UN forces defeated the Norks and shoved them back to the Chinese border the Chinese entered the war. The did not try to fight a conventional war, as they had few tanks, no air force and none of the equipment the UN had. So they adapted tactics they had used against the Japanese and later against the US trained Nationalist Chinese. They moved troops cross country not utilizing the roads and pushed the UN back into S Korea.

And take the incident with Eric Frien, one dirtbag who tied up most of the assets of the State Police and Feds for months trying to get him while he lived under their noses. Or the Branch Dividians, they tied up all the assets of the FBI and BATF for months. They even caused a morale problem amongst the feds and forced the final assault, which was a total PR disaster for the FBI.

[Keith A]

My kid came home and said he was tired of getting bullied by the really big kid at school, but he thought he should fight back or the bully would never stop. I told his mom to tie his hands behind his back and send him off to fight the bully like that, since he was going to get his ass kicked anyway.





Since things sometimes aren't as obvious as they should be, that's a story I made up to use against those particular arguments. I don't have kids, nor would I think it was somehow noble to do that.

[OwnTheRide]

My standard response to the "guns won't help you against tanks and drones" argument has a few parts. All are quite valid, though I particularly like the third as it is a direct rebuttal using contemporary examples of people using small arms to overthrow modern military forces:

1) The picture in your head is a farmer with a shotgun standing up to an army. But revolt against large government tyranny would look very different. The fighting would be be more on the order of state vs state, just like it was the last time a large group of people decided that the federal government was behaving in a tyrannical manner.

2) Tyranny comes in many forms, at all levels of government - and we have many levels of government. An individual is unlikely to experience tyranny from the level of the federal government - they're much more likely to be victimized by state or local tyranny. A popular and oft-cited example is the Battle of Athens (Tennessee). Local government officials were ridiculously corrupt. Legal channels proved ineffective. So the people took up arms and quashed the tyranny.

A more contemporary example of people taking up arms against the government might include the Bundy Bunch. Regardless of whether or not you agree with the premise of their beef with the government, they repeatedly demonstrated that armed resistance is still an effective deterrent to government action and overreach... just perhaps not the way you envision (the feds were worried about the negative publicity, not the bullets - but without the bullets, the feds would have stomped all over everyone).

3) As was done in the Battle of Athens, small arms are used to capture larger arms. This is basic warfare strategy for which we have countless contemporary examples, thanks to Arab Spring.




Small arms are used to capture larger arms, which in turn are used to capture larger arms. But step 1 requires small arms.

[fallenleader]

beautiful.

people have this misconception that tanks are built like... tanks or what they envision them to be.
they have weaknesses and their operators are also soft and squishy, they thirst, hunger and fatigue.

[PaleDriver]

And then they turn around and cheer this?

untitled-1.jpg

[streaker69]

And then they turn around and cheer this?

untitled-1.jpg

He deserved to be cheered, he stood up to tyranny, alone with hundreds if not thousands of dead around him (something that most don't realize). Problem is, the left wants that same tyranny imposed upon us.

[Stooperzero]

He deserved to be cheered, he stood up to tyranny, alone with hundreds if not thousands of dead around him (something that most don't realize). Problem is, the left wants that same tyranny imposed upon us.

they sent a bill to the surviving families for the ammo they shot them with .

[bogey1]

beautiful.

people have this misconception that tanks are built like... tanks or what they envision them to be.
they have weaknesses and their operators are also soft and squishy, they thirst, hunger and fatigue.

Can their tracks still be knocked off with a 50cal?