It is currently Sun Nov 24, 2024 6:43 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 846 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 29  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:24 pm
Posts: 17217
pizza_Place: Pequods
rogers park bryan wrote:
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
.

Besides, weapons like the AR-15 are the type of weapon needed for the 2nd Amendment to work as intended. It's purpose is to ensure we can adequately repel a tyrannical government, and weapons such as the AR-15 have already proven this capability. Just look at the Bundy Ranch Standoff in Nevada a few years back.

.

0.0000000001 % chance it will happen but if it did...0% chance you as a citizen are putting up an defense against the military.

If they wanted to, the government could have erased Bundy and his pals from existence in about 2 seconds.

Goat fuckers with old Soviet shit have stymied the USA for over a decade in Afghanistan. An F-22 can't stand on a street corner.

You think the US military couldn't wipe them out if they chose to?

Seems maybe the reason that hasn't happened is the projected reaction, not the inability to complete it.

No, it really can't. We dropped more bombs on Vietnam than in all of WWII and it did fuck all.

Time and time again it has been proven light arms and guerrilla tactics will defeat a conventional army

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:16 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
FavreFan wrote:
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
.

Besides, weapons like the AR-15 are the type of weapon needed for the 2nd Amendment to work as intended. It's purpose is to ensure we can adequately repel a tyrannical government, and weapons such as the AR-15 have already proven this capability. Just look at the Bundy Ranch Standoff in Nevada a few years back.

.

0.0000000001 % chance it will happen but if it did...0% chance you as a citizen are putting up an defense against the military.

If they wanted to, the government could have erased Bundy and his pals from existence in about 2 seconds.

Goat fuckers with old Soviet shit have stymied the USA for over a decade in Afghanistan. An F-22 can't stand on a street corner.

Yeah. Pretty much the entire history of the world would disagree with RPB there.

So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
rogers park bryan wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
.

Besides, weapons like the AR-15 are the type of weapon needed for the 2nd Amendment to work as intended. It's purpose is to ensure we can adequately repel a tyrannical government, and weapons such as the AR-15 have already proven this capability. Just look at the Bundy Ranch Standoff in Nevada a few years back.

.

0.0000000001 % chance it will happen but if it did...0% chance you as a citizen are putting up an defense against the military.

If they wanted to, the government could have erased Bundy and his pals from existence in about 2 seconds.

Goat fuckers with old Soviet shit have stymied the USA for over a decade in Afghanistan. An F-22 can't stand on a street corner.

Yeah. Pretty much the entire history of the world would disagree with RPB there.

So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?

No.

But if there was a large armed resistance than the answer would then become yes.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
.

Besides, weapons like the AR-15 are the type of weapon needed for the 2nd Amendment to work as intended. It's purpose is to ensure we can adequately repel a tyrannical government, and weapons such as the AR-15 have already proven this capability. Just look at the Bundy Ranch Standoff in Nevada a few years back.

.

0.0000000001 % chance it will happen but if it did...0% chance you as a citizen are putting up an defense against the military.


So our rights are now conditional based on the probability that we could effectively...use them? That doesn't sound like a good approach.

I think a discussion based in reality is more productive than one based in an idyllic setting that doesn't exist.

Does the 2A mention AR-15s? Cause I'm not talking about taking the right to own any firearm away.

Does the 1A mention the internet?

No.

So if someone suggested limiting the ability of terrorists to congregate online, I wouldn't consider it an attack on free speech.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:32 pm
Posts: 13865
Location: France
pizza_Place: Baranabyis
rogers park bryan wrote:
So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?

Well the US military is feasibly capable of eradicating the civilian population with chemical or nuclear weapons, but if it gets to that point you'll wish you stood up to them with your AR-15's before it got to where the government became so tyrannical that it'd nuke its own people.

But assuming the government is unwilling to kill everyone just to take out the partisans, yes. Ogie and his buddies would be able to eventually wear down and sap the US military of its will to fight.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
.

Besides, weapons like the AR-15 are the type of weapon needed for the 2nd Amendment to work as intended. It's purpose is to ensure we can adequately repel a tyrannical government, and weapons such as the AR-15 have already proven this capability. Just look at the Bundy Ranch Standoff in Nevada a few years back.

.

0.0000000001 % chance it will happen but if it did...0% chance you as a citizen are putting up an defense against the military.

If they wanted to, the government could have erased Bundy and his pals from existence in about 2 seconds.

Goat fuckers with old Soviet shit have stymied the USA for over a decade in Afghanistan. An F-22 can't stand on a street corner.

Yeah. Pretty much the entire history of the world would disagree with RPB there.

So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?

No.

But if there was a large armed resistance than the answer would then become yes.

Ok, so my original statement was correct.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:24 pm
Posts: 17217
pizza_Place: Pequods
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
.

Besides, weapons like the AR-15 are the type of weapon needed for the 2nd Amendment to work as intended. It's purpose is to ensure we can adequately repel a tyrannical government, and weapons such as the AR-15 have already proven this capability. Just look at the Bundy Ranch Standoff in Nevada a few years back.

.

0.0000000001 % chance it will happen but if it did...0% chance you as a citizen are putting up an defense against the military.

If they wanted to, the government could have erased Bundy and his pals from existence in about 2 seconds.

Goat fuckers with old Soviet shit have stymied the USA for over a decade in Afghanistan. An F-22 can't stand on a street corner.

Yeah. Pretty much the entire history of the world would disagree with RPB there.

So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?

No.

But if there was a large armed resistance than the answer would then become yes.

and recent history would back this up. The Taliban does not have any tanks, fighter jets, etc. but here they are 16 years later and gaining ground. We never repelled the Vietcong either.

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:15 am
Posts: 27591
pizza_Place: nick n vito's
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
.

Besides, weapons like the AR-15 are the type of weapon needed for the 2nd Amendment to work as intended. It's purpose is to ensure we can adequately repel a tyrannical government, and weapons such as the AR-15 have already proven this capability. Just look at the Bundy Ranch Standoff in Nevada a few years back.

.

0.0000000001 % chance it will happen but if it did...0% chance you as a citizen are putting up an defense against the military.

If they wanted to, the government could have erased Bundy and his pals from existence in about 2 seconds.

Goat fuckers with old Soviet shit have stymied the USA for over a decade in Afghanistan. An F-22 can't stand on a street corner.

Yeah. Pretty much the entire history of the world would disagree with RPB there.

So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?

No.

But if there was a large armed resistance than the answer would then become yes.




A couple drone strikes would obliterate any armed uprising.

_________________
The Original Kid Cairo wrote:
Laurence Holmes is a fucking weirdo, a nerd in denial, and a wannabe. Not a very good radio host either.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
rogers park bryan wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
0.0000000001 % chance it will happen but if it did...0% chance you as a citizen are putting up an defense against the military.

If they wanted to, the government could have erased Bundy and his pals from existence in about 2 seconds.

Goat fuckers with old Soviet shit have stymied the USA for over a decade in Afghanistan. An F-22 can't stand on a street corner.

Yeah. Pretty much the entire history of the world would disagree with RPB there.

So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?

No.

But if there was a large armed resistance than the answer would then become yes.

Ok, so my original statement was correct.

No. Your 0% comment is completely wrong, and goes against the entire history of human civilization.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?

Well the US military is feasibly capable of eradicating the civilian population with chemical or nuclear weapons, but if it gets to that point you'll wish you stood up to them with your AR-15's before it got to where the government became so tyrannical that it'd nuke its own people.

But assuming the government is unwilling to kill everyone just to take out the partisans, yes. Ogie and his buddies would be able to eventually wear down and sap the US military of its will to fight.

You're saying the US military couldn't kill Ogie and 6 of his friends without chemical weapons?

Sounds like a terrible army.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:24 pm
Posts: 17217
pizza_Place: Pequods
312player wrote:

A couple drone strikes would obliterate any armed uprising.

How well has that worked in Afghanistan?

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:43 pm
Posts: 20537
pizza_Place: Joes Pizza
Caller Bob wrote:
The solution is more guns.

yup.

this thread is a perfect example of how gun debate goes. the conclusion always ends up being the solution to gun violence is add more guns.


Last edited by Kirkwood on Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:24 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92042
Location: To the left of my post
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
America wrote:
If you wanted to do something serious about gun deaths you'd criminalize handguns, which are definitely much more dangerous and claim many times over the amount of lives than the spooky AR-15. I could actually get behind that, but its really all about image and glocks aren't really that scary looking so I'm probably not going to find much support.

Also, the reason the pro-guns refuse to cede any ground is they are acutely aware that the long-term goal is to just repeal the 2A and ban all guns. Granting any incremental progress or momentum towards that goal brings the day it happens that much closer. They are 100% correct too, you dont have to look very hard to see that the ideological core of the left wants to ban guns as part of their great culture war.

The biggest reason to repeal the 2A is if these continue to be an unsolvable problem with extreme resistance to any new legislation about it. If the gun lobby wants to fight any small incremental change then they set themselves up for enough people getting tired of it and changing the "living document" of the Constitution.

Nah. Guns aren't going anywhere

yeah, you need 2/3rds in both houses and 3/4th of state legislatures. That's not happening and I'm thankful for that.

I think you underestimate how opinions change as the generations go on. It obviously isn't going to happen quickly but who knows what happens when the generation that literally has to do "Guy here to kill everyone with a gun" drills in high school gets into adulthood, and then there kids are doing the same drills and the solutions are useless mentions of "MENTAL HEALTH!" and "BUT HUNTERS!" which results in literally no meaningful progress on the issue for their lives.

It's not like the other amendments that got passed everyone was like "Yeah, that one will be easy and obvious for future generations".

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:24 pm
Posts: 17217
pizza_Place: Pequods
rogers park bryan wrote:
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?

Well the US military is feasibly capable of eradicating the civilian population with chemical or nuclear weapons, but if it gets to that point you'll wish you stood up to them with your AR-15's before it got to where the government became so tyrannical that it'd nuke its own people.

But assuming the government is unwilling to kill everyone just to take out the partisans, yes. Ogie and his buddies would be able to eventually wear down and sap the US military of its will to fight.

You're saying the US military couldn't kill Ogie and 6 of his friends without chemical weapons?

Sounds like a terrible army.

I don't think you realize how large the militia movement has become. The government is already scared of it and if you don't believe me, why do you think they stood down in Nevada?

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
FavreFan wrote:
No. Your 0% comment is completely wrong, and goes against the entire history of human civilization.

No it's right. You are expanding it to a well arned uprising. That is not the situation. We're talking Ogie and his buddies. He even gave the Bundy example.

And what happened 2-300 years ago is hardly relevant in 2018.

This is the 2018 US military vs Ogie and 6 of his friends.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 3:18 pm
Posts: 19487
pizza_Place: Phils' on 35th all you need to know
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
[
I wonder what the number is with kids?

More killed in Mass shootings or street violence?

More under-18's probably die in Chicago alone than in all school shootings in the entire country.

55 have already been killed in Chicago this year, I'm not gonna parse the numbers but it wouldn't shock me if 17 teenagers are among the dead.


Hey Jackass does not seem to track age of victim

_________________
When I am stuck and need to figure something out I always remember the Immortal words of Socrates when he said:"I just drank what?"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:32 pm
Posts: 13865
Location: France
pizza_Place: Baranabyis
rogers park bryan wrote:
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?

Well the US military is feasibly capable of eradicating the civilian population with chemical or nuclear weapons, but if it gets to that point you'll wish you stood up to them with your AR-15's before it got to where the government became so tyrannical that it'd nuke its own people.

But assuming the government is unwilling to kill everyone just to take out the partisans, yes. Ogie and his buddies would be able to eventually wear down and sap the US military of its will to fight.

You're saying the US military couldn't kill Ogie and 6 of his friends without chemical weapons?

Sounds like a terrible army.

Yes the US military is capable of assassinating one or a handful of people.

But the US military has proven repeatedly over the course of its entire existence that is completely incapable of defeating even scattered resistance that is only organized ideologically.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 7:43 pm
Posts: 20537
pizza_Place: Joes Pizza
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?

Well the US military is feasibly capable of eradicating the civilian population with chemical or nuclear weapons, but if it gets to that point you'll wish you stood up to them with your AR-15's before it got to where the government became so tyrannical that it'd nuke its own people.

But assuming the government is unwilling to kill everyone just to take out the partisans, yes. Ogie and his buddies would be able to eventually wear down and sap the US military of its will to fight.

You're saying the US military couldn't kill Ogie and 6 of his friends without chemical weapons?

Sounds like a terrible army.

I don't think you realize how large the militia movement has become. The government is already scared of it and if you don't believe me, why do you think they stood down in Nevada?

mercy.

they should've been bombed into oblivion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
rogers park bryan wrote:
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?

Well the US military is feasibly capable of eradicating the civilian population with chemical or nuclear weapons, but if it gets to that point you'll wish you stood up to them with your AR-15's before it got to where the government became so tyrannical that it'd nuke its own people.

But assuming the government is unwilling to kill everyone just to take out the partisans, yes. Ogie and his buddies would be able to eventually wear down and sap the US military of its will to fight.

You're saying the US military couldn't kill Ogie and 6 of his friends without chemical weapons?

Sounds like a terrible army.

Deliberately misrepresenting the opposing argument is a bad look. We both know we aren’t talking about a group of a dozen guys but a much larger resistance. The kind you would see if confiscation actually started gaining mainstream consideration.

Nobody here is arguing that 8 guys are gonna take out an army.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:24 pm
Posts: 17217
pizza_Place: Pequods
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
America wrote:
If you wanted to do something serious about gun deaths you'd criminalize handguns, which are definitely much more dangerous and claim many times over the amount of lives than the spooky AR-15. I could actually get behind that, but its really all about image and glocks aren't really that scary looking so I'm probably not going to find much support.

Also, the reason the pro-guns refuse to cede any ground is they are acutely aware that the long-term goal is to just repeal the 2A and ban all guns. Granting any incremental progress or momentum towards that goal brings the day it happens that much closer. They are 100% correct too, you dont have to look very hard to see that the ideological core of the left wants to ban guns as part of their great culture war.

The biggest reason to repeal the 2A is if these continue to be an unsolvable problem with extreme resistance to any new legislation about it. If the gun lobby wants to fight any small incremental change then they set themselves up for enough people getting tired of it and changing the "living document" of the Constitution.

Nah. Guns aren't going anywhere

yeah, you need 2/3rds in both houses and 3/4th of state legislatures. That's not happening and I'm thankful for that.

I think you underestimate how opinions change as the generations go on. It obviously isn't going to happen quickly but who knows what happens when the generation that literally has to do "Guy here to kill everyone with a gun" drills in high school gets into adulthood, and then there kids are doing the same drills and the solutions are useless mentions of "MENTAL HEALTH!" and "BUT HUNTERS!" which results in literally no meaningful progress on the issue for their lives.

It's not like the other amendments that got passed everyone was like "Yeah, that one will be easy and obvious for future generations".

All you need is 13 state legislatures to vote no and the Amendment dies

I have 13 states which will never vote to ban guns for you:

MS
AK
AL
AR
IN
TX
GA
SC
WV
MT
ND
SD
ID

There are more states I could add to the list, but right here you get to 13 which blocks the Amendment. It's never going to happen

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 22456
pizza_Place: Giordano's
rogers park bryan wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
.

Besides, weapons like the AR-15 are the type of weapon needed for the 2nd Amendment to work as intended. It's purpose is to ensure we can adequately repel a tyrannical government, and weapons such as the AR-15 have already proven this capability. Just look at the Bundy Ranch Standoff in Nevada a few years back.

.

0.0000000001 % chance it will happen but if it did...0% chance you as a citizen are putting up an defense against the military.


So our rights are now conditional based on the probability that we could effectively...use them? That doesn't sound like a good approach.

I think a discussion based in reality is more productive than one based in an idyllic setting that doesn't exist.

Does the 2A mention AR-15s? Cause I'm not talking about taking the right to own any firearm away.


Yeah, and what really are the chances I'll be asked to give testimony against myself before a court or Congress? And come to think of it, what really are the chances I will be unlawfully detained by the police or even have my home or person searched?

Man, this Bill of Rights thing goes pretty quickly when we use your approach. Thanks!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:24 pm
Posts: 17217
pizza_Place: Pequods
Kirkwood wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?

Well the US military is feasibly capable of eradicating the civilian population with chemical or nuclear weapons, but if it gets to that point you'll wish you stood up to them with your AR-15's before it got to where the government became so tyrannical that it'd nuke its own people.

But assuming the government is unwilling to kill everyone just to take out the partisans, yes. Ogie and his buddies would be able to eventually wear down and sap the US military of its will to fight.

You're saying the US military couldn't kill Ogie and 6 of his friends without chemical weapons?

Sounds like a terrible army.

I don't think you realize how large the militia movement has become. The government is already scared of it and if you don't believe me, why do you think they stood down in Nevada?

mercy.

they should've been bombed into oblivion.

Well the government tried that approach at Waco and it got them Oklahoma City

Tell me, what would have happened if there was a massacre in Nevada?

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson


Last edited by Ogie Oglethorpe on Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:29 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?

Well the US military is feasibly capable of eradicating the civilian population with chemical or nuclear weapons, but if it gets to that point you'll wish you stood up to them with your AR-15's before it got to where the government became so tyrannical that it'd nuke its own people.

But assuming the government is unwilling to kill everyone just to take out the partisans, yes. Ogie and his buddies would be able to eventually wear down and sap the US military of its will to fight.

You're saying the US military couldn't kill Ogie and 6 of his friends without chemical weapons?

Sounds like a terrible army.

I don't think you realize how large the militia movement has become. The government is already scared of it and if you don't believe me, why do you think they stood down in Nevada?

They didn't stand down because they were outgunned or unable to take out the opposition.

Is that what you believe?

Seems much more likely the likely reaction to them murdering people is what stopped them.

It's not AR 15s that protect you, it's the people (without their guns)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
rogers park bryan wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
No. Your 0% comment is completely wrong, and goes against the entire history of human civilization.

No it's right. You are expanding it to a well arned uprising. That is not the situation. We're talking Ogie and his buddies. He even gave the Bundy example.

And what happened 2-300 years ago is hardly relevant in 2018.

This is the 2018 US military vs Ogie and 6 of his friends.

What happened 300 years ago is definitely relevant. There’s a reason Sun Tzu is still taught at military academies.

But yeah if you want to just boil it down to 7 guys vs an army I have no choice but to concede that point. But then this simply becomes a waste of both our times because revolutions aren’t fought by 7 guys.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?

Well the US military is feasibly capable of eradicating the civilian population with chemical or nuclear weapons, but if it gets to that point you'll wish you stood up to them with your AR-15's before it got to where the government became so tyrannical that it'd nuke its own people.

But assuming the government is unwilling to kill everyone just to take out the partisans, yes. Ogie and his buddies would be able to eventually wear down and sap the US military of its will to fight.

You're saying the US military couldn't kill Ogie and 6 of his friends without chemical weapons?

Sounds like a terrible army.

Deliberately misrepresenting the opposing argument is a bad look. We both know we aren’t talking about a group of a dozen guys but a much larger resistance. The kind you would see if confiscation actually started gaining mainstream consideration.

Nobody here is arguing that 8 guys are gonna take out an army.

You over use the _____ is a bad look thing. It's ironically....a bad look.

How many people did Bundy have?

That was and continues to be the example Ogie us using.

You think the US military is unable to take out Bundy and pals?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92042
Location: To the left of my post
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
America wrote:
If you wanted to do something serious about gun deaths you'd criminalize handguns, which are definitely much more dangerous and claim many times over the amount of lives than the spooky AR-15. I could actually get behind that, but its really all about image and glocks aren't really that scary looking so I'm probably not going to find much support.

Also, the reason the pro-guns refuse to cede any ground is they are acutely aware that the long-term goal is to just repeal the 2A and ban all guns. Granting any incremental progress or momentum towards that goal brings the day it happens that much closer. They are 100% correct too, you dont have to look very hard to see that the ideological core of the left wants to ban guns as part of their great culture war.

The biggest reason to repeal the 2A is if these continue to be an unsolvable problem with extreme resistance to any new legislation about it. If the gun lobby wants to fight any small incremental change then they set themselves up for enough people getting tired of it and changing the "living document" of the Constitution.

Nah. Guns aren't going anywhere

yeah, you need 2/3rds in both houses and 3/4th of state legislatures. That's not happening and I'm thankful for that.

I think you underestimate how opinions change as the generations go on. It obviously isn't going to happen quickly but who knows what happens when the generation that literally has to do "Guy here to kill everyone with a gun" drills in high school gets into adulthood, and then there kids are doing the same drills and the solutions are useless mentions of "MENTAL HEALTH!" and "BUT HUNTERS!" which results in literally no meaningful progress on the issue for their lives.

It's not like the other amendments that got passed everyone was like "Yeah, that one will be easy and obvious for future generations".

All you need is 13 state legislatures to vote no and the Amendment dies

I have 13 states which will never vote to ban guns for you:

MS
AK
AL
AR
IN
TX
GA
SC
WV
MT
ND
SD
ID

There are more states I could add to the list, but right here you get to 13 which blocks the Amendment. It's never going to happen

I'm sure people thought that about many other amendments too.

I mean, we passed one banning alcohol which most people liked and passed one repealing that one. We passed one banning slavery. I doubt those were foreseen 50 or 100 years earlier either.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:24 pm
Posts: 17217
pizza_Place: Pequods
rogers park bryan wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?

Well the US military is feasibly capable of eradicating the civilian population with chemical or nuclear weapons, but if it gets to that point you'll wish you stood up to them with your AR-15's before it got to where the government became so tyrannical that it'd nuke its own people.

But assuming the government is unwilling to kill everyone just to take out the partisans, yes. Ogie and his buddies would be able to eventually wear down and sap the US military of its will to fight.

You're saying the US military couldn't kill Ogie and 6 of his friends without chemical weapons?

Sounds like a terrible army.

I don't think you realize how large the militia movement has become. The government is already scared of it and if you don't believe me, why do you think they stood down in Nevada?

They didn't stand down because they were outgunned or unable to take out the opposition.

Is that what you believe?

Seems much more likely the likely reaction to them murdering people is what stopped them.

It's not AR 15s that protect you, it's the people (without their guns)

In terms of forces deployed, the Feds were actually outgunned at Bundy Ranch It would've been a brutal battle on both sides had shooting started so the Feds wisely withdrew.

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 10:32 pm
Posts: 13865
Location: France
pizza_Place: Baranabyis
rogers park bryan wrote:
You over use the _____ is a bad look thing. It's ironically....a bad look.

How many people did Bundy have?

That was and continues to be the example Ogie us using.

You think the US military is unable to take out Bundy and pals?

So the US government is afraid of murdering people because they dont want to incite an armed insurrection that they know they cannot win....and you say that's a bad thing?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
No. Your 0% comment is completely wrong, and goes against the entire history of human civilization.

No it's right. You are expanding it to a well arned uprising. That is not the situation. We're talking Ogie and his buddies. He even gave the Bundy example.

And what happened 2-300 years ago is hardly relevant in 2018.

This is the 2018 US military vs Ogie and 6 of his friends.

What happened 300 years ago is definitely relevant. There’s a reason Sun Tzu is still taught at military academies.

But yeah if you want to just boil it down to 7 guys vs an army I have no choice but to concede that point. But then this simply becomes a waste of both our times because revolutions aren’t fought by 7 guys.

Sun Tzu's ideas are relevant.

Armies from the 18th century being susceptible to citizen uprising is not.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 15, 2018 10:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
rogers park bryan wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
America wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
So Ogie and his buddies in his well regulated militia could stand up to the United States military?

Well the US military is feasibly capable of eradicating the civilian population with chemical or nuclear weapons, but if it gets to that point you'll wish you stood up to them with your AR-15's before it got to where the government became so tyrannical that it'd nuke its own people.

But assuming the government is unwilling to kill everyone just to take out the partisans, yes. Ogie and his buddies would be able to eventually wear down and sap the US military of its will to fight.

You're saying the US military couldn't kill Ogie and 6 of his friends without chemical weapons?

Sounds like a terrible army.

Deliberately misrepresenting the opposing argument is a bad look. We both know we aren’t talking about a group of a dozen guys but a much larger resistance. The kind you would see if confiscation actually started gaining mainstream consideration.

Nobody here is arguing that 8 guys are gonna take out an army.

You over use the _____ is a bad look thing. It's ironically....a bad look.

How many people did Bundy have?

That was and continues to be the example Ogie us using.

You think the US military is unable to take out Bundy and pals?

They probably could but they didn’t. If they had wiped them out there’s a good chance they would have created an even larger uprising.

The point is the US Army would unequivocally not be able to put down a large armed revolution among its citizens. If the armed resistance was based on repealing the 2A there’s a huge contingent of soldiers that would straight up join the resistance.

It’s infinitely more complicated than how you’re making it out to be.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 846 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 29  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group