Niggas be trollin in here.
And you think you could overthrow the government with your rifles?
When they have the military at their disposal? Get fucking real.
I suggest you go back and read the exchange we had earlier about that EXACT same statement. Your reason is failing, but we can dance that dance again, if you want. I'm willing to bet that even though you have a posse which agrees with you, I will still technically defeat your stance because I have a ridiculous amount of information at my disposal on the subject of guns and government, and i'd bet my testicles that you do not. You likely get your information from media, and word of mouth from like minded friends.
Bring it, Adam. It could be fun if you got serious about it. I really enjoy stomping all over disillusionment.
His point is the same as mine and very, very simple. It takes a lot more than guns to overthrow a government today, corrupt or otherwise. The illusion of an armed citizen as hinted by the 2d amendment is just that, an illusion. If you want enough firepower to overthrow your government, you'd better make the NRA more efficient because they are lobbying for the wrong thing.
You might as well use harsh words.
If you go back and read instead of skim, you will discover I stated very clearly that it takes more than firearms to overthrow a government, but there is no chance without them. Let me paraphrase. Firearms are required for rebellion, along with many other tecniques and equipment. This being said, yes I do think it is possible to take on the American government and straighten them out, IF everyone pulled their heads out of the sand and stopped being irresponsible little faggots. As in this is their mess to clean up, not the government's.
If you actually read the thread instead of giving in to the knee-jerk, you will note that this thread is yet another example of the usual I2 gun law debate, which gives it a context in which both our replies should be read. The thread is not titled "the things I actually need to overthrow the government".
I've said time and again that you need a lot more than guns if you want to realistically overthrow a corrupt government, which is the raison d'etre for the 2d amendment and what you people will frequently refer to when wanting to keep your guns, whatever the cost.
I think that should indeed be part of the training. In this way, the public who wished to own firearms would have the basic skills a soldier is given, and be able to make those quick judgements based on experience. For instance, one would quickly scan an attacker for weapons. If they are armed with a gun, then kill them. If they are armed with anything else, shoot them in the leg or the arms.
That's an excellent point. Thanks for bringing it up.
What ever happened to warning shots? You know, your kid's friend's cue to go "Wait! It's me!"
If someone receives the proper training, they will be able to judge whether or not an attacker is a threat. There should be no need for warning shots. If someone makes the mistake of going for someone with a knife, they should be ready to accept the fact that they may get a hole in their leg.
This is bullshit, Rage. There are plenty of examples of trained folks getting it wrong.
Lazy trained folks. Trained folks that don't give 110% in their job. Yeah i'm sure you could show me plenty of examples of those. Find me an example of one motivated and dedicated soldier or law enforcement officer who "got it wrong". I CHALLENGE YOU, sir.
I won't feed your circle jerk, then. I bet that you'd dismiss every example I'd produce as someone not giving "110%". What's the bloody point?
