History question: Civilian guns vs government

[DogBonz]

AMEN

It's standard anti rhetoric that gun owners will be helpless against a tyrant state. And it's true that if they use artillery and jets you really have little defense. But then again, if you force the tyrant state to show its true face by using high explosives from F-16's against its own civilian populations, you've accomplished something very important

This brings up the biggest unknown. In our 1000+ channel direct TV, high speed internet, everybody with a video camera is a reporter world, how many people would sit idle while the US government rained smart bombs on its own civilians? How many soldiers would fire upon their own country men? How many soldiers, pilots, policemen, etc would defect to the other side (the right side)? The Federalies can attack a small group of religious cult members with impunity because most people consider them whacko’s or nut jobs, but I seriously doubt that Americans would sit silent if a large number good hard working people were being fired upon by military personnel.

But, the worst thing is that the second that we (Americans) start fighting among ourselves, we become instantly vulnerable to attack and/or invasion from any of our numerous enemies.

OK OK I’m done… I’m taking my tinfoil hat off and take a nap. Sorry guys too much coffee.

 

[Joe Demko]

Vasily Zaitsev served as a Junior Lieutenant in the 1047th rifle regiment of the 284th rifle division of the 62nd Army at the time of the battle of Stalingrad. He was a military man and not some Russian version of a good ol' boy with a rifle takin' on them furriners.

 

[junyo]

At what points in history has civilian arms actually worked vs a government?

Depends on what your definition of worked is. If by worked you mean removed the government by sheer force of arms, rarely. If by worked you mean significantly altered the political/social situation or forced major concessions from the ruling power, fairly often.
Iraq and Vietnam demonstrate that you can consistently lose on at the tactical level, and yet win at the strategic level purely with a handful of guns and some clever infowarfare. The peaceful civil rights movement of the 60's was significantly helped by being the more palatable alternative to the more militant groups. Darn near every colonial power that decided that putting down the revolution of the week wasn't worth an outpost in Whogivesacrapswana. The Palestinians, who've bombed and murdered their way to being recognized as a state.

 

[Keith Wheeler]

At what points in history has civilian arms actually worked vs a government?

And, in addition to junyo's reply, the Afghans against the Soviets.

But you've got to keep in mind, that those few cases where "the people" have been able to successfully defeat their government, there was a rich, powerful, well armed backer of "the people". From the American Revolution to the Soviet-Afghan war, for "good ol' boys" and farmers to defeat a government, it takes the backing of another government.

 

[Deanimator]

From 1929 to 1953 approximately 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Actually, most of the victims of the Soviet system WEREN'T dissidents. In fact, most of them were fanatically loyal to the Soviet system. Most people don't understand the Stalinist system. Guilt or innocence were totally irrelevant. Stalin was at best indifferent to discovering real plots against himself, nevermind the Soviet State. Rather he took a much more proactive approach. Instead of trying to find people actually opposed to the system, he simply set out to create such a culture of paralyzing fear in society that people would be too consumed with dread and paranoia to even CONSIDER opposition to the system. To this end, he reduced matters of life and death to the level of a parking ticket quota. He issued to regional NKVD officials, monthly "norms" for the arrest of "spies", "saboteurs", etc. Those who failed to meet their assigned quotas were themselves at risk of being fed into the system. People were too busily engaged in a futile attempt to deduce the nonexistant "rules" of the system in the name of their own survival to given a moment's thought to "dissent".

 

[Deanimator]

if the united states government was serious about gun confiscations, i serious doubt the average american gun owner and the average THR poster would have the balls to get into a gun battle over defending his rights to own firearms.

1% of gunowners could totally eliminate the BATFE. In the event of an attempted anti-constitutional coup and forced disarmament, I estimate at least 3% of gunowners would take direct action.

 

[nomadboi]

French Revolution.
Bastille stormed, heads rolled.

 

[Correia]

slicknickns, aren't you a teenager?

I knew everything when I was a teenager too. Luckily we didn't have the internet then, so I wasn't able to demonstrate to the entire world how smart I was.

This sucker is done.