And it begins: Obama Renews Push to Reduce Gun Violence

[krisvds]

I have been a teacher for the better part of fifteen years. I could tell you a thing or two about trying to educate teenagers, the importance of feeling responsible for the wellbeing of other people's children and whatnot. Every individual who thinks a society that cares about the personal rights of its citizens would find it beneficial to raise and educate their children in an environment where adults stand in front of classrooms packing heat and then claim that this situation makes them feel more 'free' is in my opinion an idiot.

[Neil]

Here's another idea, if we grant that the state should determine what our needs are based on the greater good of society: alcohol and tobacco use kill far more people in the US than "assault weapons," or even than all kinds of firearms put together. And who "needs" to drink or smoke? There's certainly no explicit constitutional right to own alcohol or tobacco. So what reason is there not to ban these substances, for the greater good? Aside from the fact that we tried banning alcohol already (Prohibition), and it failed miserably. That's a good and fair point... The difference is of course, if I choose to drink or smoke, I don't typically end up contributing towards 20+ dead kids. But there are similarities of course. The government (or society) is slowly realising the -ve effects of alcohol and smoking, hence the change of freedoms on them. Try smoking in a public place for example... Notice the increasing cost (tax) to deter use? So society simply needs to decide if people routinely owning more guns than they need, produces a greater threat than society is willing to swallow. And I use "owning more guns than they need" with the caveat being I'm not sure what that realy means. But in the case of Adam Lanza, did his mother really need all three guns she purchased two years ago? Did she really need an assault rifle? - - - Updated - - - Why not do some of the following things? Tier gun ownership into several different categories. Hunting Rifles and Shotguns require a certain license. To get this you have to pass a practical test, and a written test. Same for Pistols Same for Assault Rifles. Each one of these licenses require mandatory safety refresher courses. Each Gun Owner must provide proof of a lockable safe with each new gun purchase. This prevents kids or criminals from simply taking their parents guns and shooting up a school. Eliminate production of Armor piercing/incendiary/dragon breath rounds for civilian use. Add additional criminal penalties for crimes committed with these rounds. Each gun purchaser must provide proof from a state licensed and certified Psychiatrist/ Psychologist stating that the owner is in sound state and mind to own a weapon. Tax on each weapon that goes towards law enforcement, anti violence campaigns, and mental health programs. Three to six day mandatory waiting period for all fire arms. You want to hunt that bad? Plan ahead guy. Drop the "We need these weapons in case the government comes." line. I'm in the Army, and If Texas wanted to quit the union. I would have no problem honoring my oath to defend the constitution against enemies both foreign and domestic and destroying rebel secessionist chodes. Not that I would have to do much, an AR-15 isn't going to stop a predator drone strike, or a Abrams Tank. General Sherman crushed Confederate forces as he burned through Georgia and the Carolinas, those jerks were armed with nearly identical weapons to Sherman. Now Imagine Sherman having Air strikes, white phosphorus rounds, Tanks, 155mm rounds against an enemy that only can muster what his lightest infantry carry. We could turn any city and any state in America into a parking lot if we wanted to Launch Total war, I'm not talking the limited use of force and precession strikes like in Iraq, but total war. and no amount of poorly trained, AK47 wielding NRA trained asshole has any possible hope of stopping the tide of death would come his way. I'm not sure if these are good or bad suggestions, but these are the kind of premise I'm suggesting; A tightening and reducing of weapons and their ease of access... It all seems to darn casual at the moment...

[babomb]

Why not do some of the following things? Tier gun ownership into several different categories. Hunting Rifles and Shotguns require a certain license. To get this you have to pass a practical test, and a written test. Same for Pistols Same for Assault Rifles. Each one of these licenses require mandatory safety refresher courses. Each Gun Owner must provide proof of a lockable safe with each new gun purchase. This prevents kids or criminals from simply taking their parents guns and shooting up a school. Eliminate production of Armor piercing/incendiary/dragon breath rounds for civilian use. Add additional criminal penalties for crimes committed with these rounds. Each gun purchaser must provide proof from a state licensed and certified Psychiatrist/ Psychologist stating that the owner is in sound state and mind to own a weapon. Tax on each weapon that goes towards law enforcement, anti violence campaigns, and mental health programs. Three to six day mandatory waiting period for all fire arms. You want to hunt that bad? Plan ahead guy. Drop the "We need these weapons in case the government comes." line. I'm in the Army, and If Texas wanted to quit the union. I would have no problem honoring my oath to defend the constitution against enemies both foreign and domestic and destroying rebel secessionist chodes. Not that I would have to do much, an AR-15 isn't going to stop a predator drone strike, or a Abrams Tank. General Sherman crushed Confederate forces as he burned through Georgia and the Carolinas, those jerks were armed with nearly identical weapons to Sherman. Now Imagine Sherman having Air strikes, white phosphorus rounds, Tanks, 155mm rounds against an enemy that only can muster what his lightest infantry carry. We could turn any city and any state in America into a parking lot if we wanted to Launch Total war, I'm not talking the limited use of force and precession strikes like in Iraq, but total war. and no amount of poorly trained, AK47 wielding NRA trained asshole has any possible hope of stopping the tide of death would come his way. This is exactly why we need them! Out of curiosity, what is it that makes you see secessionists as an enemy? Or are you just eager to "get some"? Have you not learned anything from the military or history? Insurgents don't need to match the firepower of an organized army. All they have to do is drag things out for an extended period. Inflicting small wounds and making things very difficult. You'd never be able to match their resolve. Because you're just following orders while they're fighting for their lives. I'm sure you think you can match or even exceed their resolve. But that's just your ego talking. Which has no bearing on reality. - - - Updated - - - But there are similarities of course. The government (or society) is slowly realising the -ve effects of alcohol and smoking, hence the change of freedoms on them. Try smoking in a public place for example... Notice the increasing cost (tax) to deter use? Yeah, that increasing cost/tax is to deter use!? So the idea here is that additional costs on addictive substances will make people stop using it? Not hardly. They'll keep using it, and pay the extra money, and those who impose the tax reap those benefits.

[Publius]

Stray and Publius! Hope your holidays and all else are going well, guys. Same to you, pal! We could turn any city and any state in America into a parking lot if we wanted to Launch Total war, I'm not talking the limited use of force and precession strikes like in Iraq, but total war. and no amount of poorly trained, AK47 wielding NRA trained asshole has any possible hope of stopping the tide of death would come his way. That skips past a rather obvious question: how likely is the relationship between the U.S. military and the civilian population to go directly from normal Posse Comitatus Act situation straight to "total war," skipping heavy-handed military assistance of civilian law enforcement, Iraq-style counterinsurgency operations, and everything in between those levels of force and "total war"? Gun control advocates sneer at the utility (or futility) of "assault weapons" in defeating the regular military in a total war scenario, but the real question is whether they could potentially deter the military from moving against their friends and neighbors on a much lower step of the force continuum. That's a good and fair point... The difference is of course, if I choose to drink or smoke, I don't typically end up contributing towards 20+ dead kids. Actually, you do (and I do, and so does everyone else who does not support alcohol prohibition), and in exactly the same way. Drunk drivers kill kids in greater numbers than maniacs with "assault weapons." I don't think that YOU are likely to drive drunk and kill kids, or to go out and shoot kids with an "assault weapon" even if you owned one. But the fact is that the cost of preserving the freedom of reasonable people like you to do either of these things is accepting the risk that some unreasonable people will also abuse the same freedom. If you want to be able to choose to drink, you do so knowing that some people will choose to drink and drive, and some kids will die as a result. The only difference is that drunk drivers kill more kids in smaller batches (usually one or two at a time), while nutcases with "assault weapons" kill fewer kids but occasionally in larger groups. The fact that the spree killings get more attention is merely a fluke of the way the news media works. A Newtown or Columbine shooting is front page news, a dozen fatal drunk driving accidents are background noise.

[strayrider]

Drop the "We need these weapons in case the government comes." line. I'm in the Army, and If Texas wanted to quit the union. I would have no problem honoring my oath to defend the constitution against enemies both foreign and domestic and destroying rebel secessionist chodes. Not that I would have to do much, an AR-15 isn't going to stop a predator drone strike, or a Abrams Tank. General Sherman crushed Confederate forces as he burned through Georgia and the Carolinas, those jerks were armed with nearly identical weapons to Sherman. Now Imagine Sherman having Air strikes, white phosphorus rounds, Tanks, 155mm rounds against an enemy that only can muster what his lightest infantry carry. We could turn any city and any state in America into a parking lot if we wanted to Launch Total war, I'm not talking the limited use of force and precession strikes like in Iraq, but total war. and no amount of poorly trained, AK47 wielding NRA trained asshole has any possible hope of stopping the tide of death would come his way. Let's see, you as an American soldier admit that you would shoot civilians (i.e., chodes) while in the process of violating their Constitutional rights. You further suggest that the use of heavy ordnance against civilian (i.e., chode) targets is acceptable. Thank you for supporting my argument, however unwittingly. Yup, poorly trained NRA assholes definitely need to hang on to their semi-automatic rifles (especially while elite storm-troopers like Exatreides "The Chode Destroyer" are in "service"). Perhaps the military needs stricter psychological guidelines as to who, and who cannot, serve? Just kiddin', Ex, we know that you are not mentally disturbed. Wanting to destroy "chodes" is normal. Whatever keeps you warm at night, mon ami. -stray-

[Neil]

Actually, you do (and I do, and so does everyone else who does not support alcohol prohibition), and in exactly the same way. Drunk drivers kill kids in greater numbers than maniacs with "assault weapons." I don't think that YOU are likely to drive drunk and kill kids, or to go out and shoot kids with an "assault weapon" even if you owned one. But the fact is that the cost of preserving the freedom of reasonable people like you to do either of these things is accepting the risk that some unreasonable people will also abuse the same freedom. If you want to be able to choose to drink, you do so knowing that some people will choose to drink and drive, and some kids will die as a result. The only difference is that drunk drivers kill more kids in smaller batches (usually one or two at a time), while nutcases with "assault weapons" kill fewer kids but occasionally in larger groups. The fact that the spree killings get more attention is merely a fluke of the way the news media works. A Newtown or Columbine shooting is front page news, a dozen fatal drunk driving accidents are background noise. Fair comment. We accept alcohol and vehicles as necessary evils, and swallow the cost! But I have to say, I still really don't see the +ves in owning a bucket full of guns and/or powerful guns (assault rifles) in the name of personal security, outweighing mass shootings!?

[Exatreides]

This is exactly why we need them! Because of people like this guy. Who would obey unconstitutional orders just for a chance to kill some people. Just look at the things he says. This is the problem. They want to restrict firearms in the hands of responsible citizens, but they'll let people like him operate million dollar machines capable of destroying entire cities. And he'll do it without a 2nd thought. He's a tool of the empire of American oppression. He freely admits that he'd have no problem killing thousands of people simply because they want to secede from the union. He's brainwashed completely, willing to kill those who stand up for their own rights. It's people like that who commit these atrocities. Young males with no respect for human life. But it's Joe Average that shouldn't be trusted with a semi-auto assault rifle? That's why they don't trust us with firearms. Because we have our own minds still, and stand up for our rights and don't just follow orders. They have no problem giving him a REAL assault rifle that has the ability to shoot 3 round burst and full auto. Because he's under their control. Actually, I'm a Nurse in the Army. I treat soldiers who have been shot by assault weapons. You ever see what a 7.62 round does to the gallbladder? Or have to measure the purelent discharge from a jp drain attached to em ? I have. Have you ever had to explain to a 17 year old kid who was hit in the crossfire in a gangfight, how he's going to have to shit in a plastic bag for the rest of his life? Yeah I've done that. All of this because of gun violence. I also spent 9 weeks living, sleeping, and cradling my weapon. I can still take it apart and put it together blindfolded. Even though, I don't use one often, I still have more training then any civilian outside of law enforcement or prior military with the weapon. I've watched the night sky erupt with the flames of MLRS munitions, and Artillery rounds streak through the sky at unquestionably astonishing speeds, I've heard the belly of an A-10 and the eruption of it's targets into fine mist. Secessionists, if they do secede are not Americans, They are Texans, Confederates, Scientologists whatever they want to call themselves. They are not my countrymen at that point, They have no "constitutional rights." Hell I'm stationed in Texas right now, and have to hear this "Leaving the union." Crap all day. You think that Texas would have learned it's lesson after being a failed country once, and joining a failed nation the second time. We are one country, indivisible, with room for ass holes and all. This is not blood lust, or some 17 year old basic trainee speaking. I've served the Military for over 6 years, All that soldiers creed malarky has long left my blood. Hell, I'm a nurse in the military! So your accusations are kinda funny. I just find it laughable that people still think that they stand any chance, any chance what so ever against the US military. You don't, not at all, you would inflict some casualties yes, you would do some damage, but would never defeat the most weary of Coast Guard or Air Force reservists in battle, let alone battle hardened Marine or Army units. It's frankly rather insulting. You want change? Get involved politically, support candidates and vote for things you want, call them when they get elected, write letters. But never think that violent overthrow is even in the most remote possibility. It's not, so stop using that excuse as a reason to own assault rifles.

[Mr. Clean]

Drop the "We need these weapons in case the government comes." line. I'm in the Army, and If Texas wanted to quit the union. I would have no problem honoring my oath to defend the constitution against enemies both foreign and domestic and destroying rebel secessionist chodes. Not that I would have to do much, an AR-15 isn't going to stop a predator drone strike, or a Abrams Tank. General Sherman crushed Confederate forces as he burned through Georgia and the Carolinas, those jerks were armed with nearly identical weapons to Sherman. Now Imagine Sherman having Air strikes, white phosphorus rounds, Tanks, 155mm rounds against an enemy that only can muster what his lightest infantry carry. We could turn any city and any state in America into a parking lot if we wanted to Launch Total war, I'm not talking the limited use of force and precession strikes like in Iraq, but total war. and no amount of poorly trained, AK47 wielding NRA trained asshole has any possible hope of stopping the tide of death would come his way. You're either single and haven't been active duty very long or you're guardsman/reservist who lacks experience and training. I'm gonna take a guess say Guardsman after your comment last week about leaving the well trained militia to the National Guard and giving them all the guns. Many things wrong with what you say....First of all, you can't have "total war" EVER. At least not the military. There are these rules called "Laws of Armed Conflict"(LOAC) and "Rules of Engagement"(ROE) that YOU as a member of the U.S. Military must play by at all times. If you don't....you are subject to war crimes. Also, You are swearn to support and defend the Constitution. That includes the Bill of Rights. If Democrats tried to force a change to the second amendment and people attempted to pull away from the union, why are you so willing to kill people attempting to defend the Constituation? Are you just going straight to "I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me".? There are a few of the reasons the taliban and other shithead terrorists have been so difficult to deal with. Which is why I say an American Rebel force isn't an instant write-off. Many think that the Taliban and Al Qaeda are a bunch of dumbshits hiding and sleeping in caves. They are not. They shoot RPGs at US troops....and quickly retreat into the woods where Apaches hammer with missles and thousands of rounds only to find bodies of children after everything settles and then the taliban point fingers and start propaganda saying US military kills kids that were chopping wood. Angry family and friends of the dead swear allegiance to their case to get justice for the dead children. They also know how to get what they need. Say they need someone to make explosive detonators. Well, they sabotage a business(electronics for example) so that it will fail....once it fails....the owner can no longer provide for his family and has a huge debt. They then go to said owner and offer him a job to fabricate detonators to go on the bombs they need. The owner really has no choice but to take the offer. Since we're hitting the debt ceiling on monday....I can't see the military functioning very well if no one is receiving a paycheck. How long you willing to work without a paycheck with a very expensive home-front battle taking place? You maybe dedicated to a cause but are your fellow coworkers? I do not know what your MOS is but imagine if 2 or 3 didn't show up for work....How much more difficult would you job be then to accomplish? Could you even accomplish it missing that many hands? How many people jumping would it take before you too decided the boat was sinking and jump overboard? It takes dozens of people to launch 1 aircraft. Dozens! Imagine being a few people short. Now that operation is severly hindered. I can't possibly believe that a Lieutenant Colonel flying an F-15E....Who has flown thousands of sorties, training missions, and hundreds of combat missions.....would weigh the decision of dropping a 5,000lb GBU on a crowd of Americans(rebels) the same as dropping it on some terrorist encampment in Afghanistan. It wouldn't come as easy. The US military is not by any means unstoppable. There is a book called "Phantom Soldier" which talks about how Asians have developed techniques to negated the advantages of our technology to defeat us in combat throu our wars with them. Again, the US military is not by any means unstoppable.

[facestabber]

Actually, I'm a Nurse in the Army. I treat soldiers who have been shot by assault weapons. You ever see what a 7.62 round does to the gallbladder? Or have to measure the purelent discharge from a jp drain attached to em ? I have. Have you ever had to explain to a 17 year old kid who was hit in the crossfire in a gangfight, how he's going to have to shit in a plastic bag for the rest of his life? Yeah I've done that. All of this because of gun violence. I also spent 9 weeks living, sleeping, and cradling my weapon. I can still take it apart and put it together blindfolded. Even though, I don't use one often, I still have more training then any civilian outside of law enforcement or prior military with the weapon. I've watched the night sky erupt with the flames of MLRS munitions, and Artillery rounds streak through the sky at unquestionably astonishing speeds, I've heard the belly of an A-10 and the eruption of it's targets into fine mist. Secessionists, if they do secede are not Americans, They are Texans, Confederates, Scientologists whatever they want to call themselves. They are not my countrymen at that point, They have no "constitutional rights." Hell I'm stationed in Texas right now, and have to hear this "Leaving the union." Crap all day. You think that Texas would have learned it's lesson after being a failed country once, and joining a failed nation the second time. We are one country, indivisible, with room for ass holes and all. This is not blood lust, or some 17 year old basic trainee speaking. I've served the Military for over 6 years, All that soldiers creed malarky has long left my blood. Hell, I'm a nurse in the military! So your accusations are kinda funny. I just find it laughable that people still think that they stand any chance, any chance what so ever against the US military. You don't, not at all, you would inflict some casualties yes, you would do some damage, but would never defeat the most weary of Coast Guard or Air Force reservists in battle, let alone battle hardened Marine or Army units. It's frankly rather insulting. You want change? Get involved politically, support candidates and vote for things you want, call them when they get elected, write letters. But never think that violent overthrow is even in the most remote possibility. It's not, so stop using that excuse as a reason to own assault rifles. The only consolation I can find in all of this is that I have never met a veteran or especially a combat veteran, remotely speak or have the belief system you do. You are a nurse that doesnt like guns. Great. Youve seen bullet wounds and carnage. So have thousands of others, myself included. You are so appalled by gun violence yet speak so freely of US soldiers turning their weapons toward its citizens. At what point are so confused to think anyone here underestimates the power of the US military? If the military turned on its people we are talking about the end of the US. How effective a resistance would be can be debated but citizens with guns far outnumber soldiers. Have you studied history and conflict? Do you understand how an insurgency or rebellion fights? Its been cited here several times but does Vietnam, Afganistan ring a bell? We all saw the Iraqi Rep Guard roll its tanks onto the battlefield and as expected we demolished them. When their fighters took flight, same result. The people understand that. No one is talking about a violent overthrow but rather to defend themselves if society were to collapse. It is about keeping a 'check' in place to remind the Gov't not to overstep its bounds. And that is at the extreme of the spectrum. Do you not see how our Gov't has become a nanny state. Telling us what is good for us. It starts small. Always does. But the more freedoms they take away for 'the greater good' the closer to a police state we become. You should consider a career change very soon. After all you volunteered to be a part of a military that uses gun violence against people.

[Neil]

I actually cannot believe I'm reading what I'm reading. That in a modern western society people fear they may need to take up arms against their government/army... Seems so very alien to our mindset over here in the UK!

[babomb]

I actually cannot believe I'm reading what I'm reading. That in a modern western society people fear they may need to take up arms against their government/army... Seems so very alien to our mindset over here in the UK! What's the mindset in the UK? I've been wondering this. I just didn't want to insult anyone by saying what it seems like to me to be the UK mindset. It seems to me that from what you've said, that the mindset is that most UK folks simply trust that your government does things with the best interest of the people in mind. Maybe your government is just that wonderful, I don't live there so I don't know. But in the US we don't have that luxury. It seems like in the UK, you guys have just accepted the fact that you're ultimately powerless over your government if it were to ever become out of control and a threat to it's people. The US is a nation built by rebels for the express purpose of escaping English rule. So in other words, our founding fathers were men who just could not tolerate the way things were done in your country. So it makes perfect sense that our ways seem alien to you. This is just the way we are. We question authority, and we're constantly suspicious of it. The basis of that is that this country was founded on the idea that ALL power rests in the hands of the people. The people grant power to the state. It seems that it's the other way around over there in the UK. That's not to say that I think the UK is a dictatorship, I don't think that at all. It's a Monarchy. The US is a Republic. It was setup in such a way that it would never become what the UK is. IMO, all governments should live in fear of their citizens. It's the only way to guarantee that the people remain free. This is not blood lust, or some 17 year old basic trainee speaking. I've served the Military for over 6 years, All that soldiers creed malarky has long left my blood. Hell, I'm a nurse in the military! So your accusations are kinda funny. I just find it laughable that people still think that they stand any chance, any chance what so ever against the US military. You don't, not at all, you would inflict some casualties yes, you would do some damage, but would never defeat the most weary of Coast Guard or Air Force reservists in battle, let alone battle hardened Marine or Army units. It's frankly rather insulting. What you fail to recognize is that it doesn't matter if defeat is imminent. We don't believe it is, but that's totally beside the point. Even if defeat is gauranteed, you still fight for your freedoms! You still stand up and die if necessary. That's the American spirit. I'd think that being a soldier you'd understand that very well. It's troubling that you don't, but you're only 24 so there's still hope for you. But it's very troubling that you're so willing to trade your freedom for a little temporary and false security. You maybe dedicated to a cause but are your fellow coworkers? I do not know what your MOS is but imagine if 2 or 3 didn't show up for work....How much more difficult would you job be then to accomplish? Could you even accomplish it missing that many hands? How many people jumping would it take before you too decided the boat was sinking and jump overboard? It takes dozens of people to launch 1 aircraft. Dozens! Imagine being a few people short. Now that operation is severly hindered. Not to mention the fact that he's demonstrated the mindset of someone who is only willing to fight when victory is probable. Also, not all soldiers have his mindset. Many are freedom supporters. And won't be as eager as he is to turn their weapons on Americans that are really just trying to take back their rights, according to the concepts that this country was built on. Will soldiers be so willing to kill their fathers and brothers, friends and in-laws if/when the time comes? What he fails to recognize is that this country was built by rebels, the freedoms he enjoys daily were paid for by the blood of the same people he's so willing to turn his weapon against. He's a 24 year old soldier. He's just chest thumping. He's against assault rifles because he sees the damage they cause. Yet, he's extremely willing to use those assault rifles against his own people if they have the audacity to try and stand up for themselves against the federal government. He doesn't know which way he's going. He's offended at the thought that Americans would even try to stand up against the power of the military. He has no idea what he's saying or what he stands for. Give him another 10 years(if we have that long) and it'll be a completely different story.

[Exatreides]

Not so much. A few things. The founding fathers were also the Richest men in America (George Washington was the Richest in the colonies). They encouraged those loyal to the crown to be driven out of their homes at gunpoint and into Canada. They promised huge swaths of land to those soldiers who fought the war, and failed to deliver on most of these promises. When people refused to enlist to fight the British they tossed them in Jail. The American revolution was not a "Good Guys Vs Bad Guys." Sort of deal, it wasn't a Mel Gibson movie. Atrocities were committed on both sides, so lets not bring in "How this country was founded on rebels." argument. Not to mention, we spent quite a few years killing each other to prevent the dissolution of the union. My intent was to simply say the following: Owning assault rifles for the sole purpose of defending your self from the government is not wise. You will die. If you want change, vote. Do not think that you're AR-15 can stop the US military, you will die. Hell The Government can already do it now simply by calling you a terrorist (Which I don't support). In the case of a state leaving the union. I have no qaums fighting these rebels. if it's simply red neck Texans deciding to quit America because they don't want Obamacare, or something similar. The line between oppressing your own people and WAR is when that state declares independence. They are their own country, and are not Citizens of the United States, but of Texas, Alabama, Alaska, Vermont, or whatever. That's vastly different then being told to line up and shoot American Citizens for not paying parking tickets, that's silly. I know all about the rules of engagement, but when Texan air national guard troops attack Ft. Sill, or Ft. Polk, When American flags are burning and Federal buildings are burning, and the Citizens of Austin attacked and killed by Confederates, do you really think that the US Government is going to launch a limited war? When video reports come in of Pro American's being hung and driven out of the state, popular opinion isn't going to be that high for the rebels. It's a direct attack on National Sovereignty, no different then Mexico claiming Texas for itself, or Canada for Alaska. Hell even if we didn't invade and mop the floor with them, a total economic embargo and freezing of funds would devastate them into poverty. Before long states would break away and rejoin the Union (West Virginia did this in the American civil war). Yeah fight to the bitter end? Tell that to the Germans, the Poles, The French, the Japanese, or the Former Confederate states, when you don't have the ability to fight, you surrender. Iraq, Vietnam, and Afghanistan are all versions of limited warfare. The Military held back to limit civilian casualties. Threat of M.A.D from the soviets in Vietnam prevented an invasion of North Vietnam, and Iraq/Afghanistan had/have members of the U.N/NATO participation. That was not total war, you have to go back to World War Two for that. An American Civil war would not have to worry about Soviet Missiles or UN troops pulling their forces out, tanks would roll, and rebellions would end. The argument that any state has a right to leave the Union was ended at the conclusion of the civil war. Red Dawn was not a documentary. The whole point of that comment, was that Assault Rifles are meant for Military and to a lesser degree Law enforcement use. a 5.56 round is terrible to hunt with due to how the round likes to bounce around in victims. Stating that you need it to fight the Government, whose military has been fighting counter insurgents for going on 11 years now is silly. Saying that you should have it with out mandatory classes/licensing/pysch eval is even sillier. I am not a chest beating Hooah soldier, I hate those guys. I'm just stating my opinion. That opinion is, you don't need a fucking AK47, for god damn anything.

[krisvds]

Do you not see how our Gov't has become a nanny state. Telling us what is good for us. It starts small. Always does. But the more freedoms they take away for 'the greater good' the closer to a police state we become. You should consider a career change very soon. After all you volunteered to be a part of a military that uses gun violence against people. Just out of curiosity: how do you guys see Europe where things like strict gun control and social security are considered quite normal by most of its citizens? Do we live in nanny police states according to you or no? Some speak so easily of personal freedoms while on a philosophical level the term freedom is hardly ever discussed more deeply than a surface level 'the freedom so I could do whatever I want without anyone telling me differently.' Take the social security system away in Belgium for instance and you end up with a lot of people in poverty. I believe it was Roosefelt who said freedom from want was one of four capital freedoms. Without it you simply are not free. Giving everyone the freedom to arm themselves, 'responsible' people or no, is viewed by some (including me) as something that makes them feel less free. And I say this without endorsing police state - like politics or tirannical governments. It's just not that black and whit clear cut simple. You live in a society where people should have the freedom to express themselves, live out their lives freely. That means your personal freedoms end where those of others begin. As far as I'm aware a democracy is still the least broken of all systems wherein that is possible.

[strayrider]

That opinion is, you don't need a fucking AK47, for god damn anything. Sure we do. To act as a deterrent against guv'ment oppression. Sort of, but not exactly, like M.A.D. One thing that you consistently fail to consider in your scenarios is that the patriot groups (pro-gun, pro-traditional American values) will manned, at least in part, by ex-military personnel; some will be combat vets, trained in the use of the equipment that you are currently issued. They will be trained in insurgency/counter-insurgency operations as well. Civilians, armed with military-style, semi-automatic weapons will rally around them. You also fail to consider that some regular military units will not follow orders to "kill chodes". These non-chode killers will simply turn their weapons against whoever is issuing the "kill chodes" order and, further, might decide to neutralize those foolish enough (e.g., you and your ilk) to follow such atrocious orders. It would be a situation of non-chode killers killing chode killers. You are really quite naive if you think it would simply be: US Armed Forces versus the Chodes. That is why myself and other NRA assholes (and other individuals who opt not to be NRA assholes) choose to remain armed and prepared for the worst. We need our AK-47s (and our ARs and our Mini-14s, etc.) to support the non-chode killers currently serving in the military. Be forewarned Chode Killers; if you dare turn the weapons that we expect you to use in our defense, provided for through the sweat of our collective brow, against us; get ready for hell. You, Ex, might want to reconsider your elitist position on this matter. Your greatest threat lies not with the chodes that you wish to kill, but from a bullet to the back of your skull fired at the onset of hostilities by a soldier whose family happens to be chodes. Then again, if their family is made up of chodes, they're probably chodes too. If not chodes, then NRA assholes, yes? -stray-

[Mr. Clean]

I actually cannot believe I'm reading what I'm reading. That in a modern western society people fear they may need to take up arms against their government/army... Seems so very alien to our mindset over here in the UK! It is rather annoying that our politicans have divided the nation to this extent.