What do you think when you see new Military weapons?

Status
Not open for further replies.
some 16,000,000 or so Americans engage in "sniper practice" at least once a year
Click to expand...
Make that 15,999,999. Some of us take rifles to the woods, find a place to ambush deer, sit quietly alert, and then wake up five hours later. It's still a good day hunting. :)

Regards.
 
At the beginning of the revolution, American citizens could possess all of the terrible weapons of the soldier.

Private citizens could own cannons, rifles, swords, anything their devious little minds could think up.

Hell, even private battleships were not unheard of. Ever hear of a Privateer?

Its absurd for a bunch of farmers with bolt guns to claim parity to modern forces armed with tanks, artillery, air support, not to mention the numerous layers of support and logistics that go behind all of these things...

I think many people miss the point that the second amendment was meant to be an obstacle to tyranny by means of the factor of fear and cost. When those same farmers have access to all the of the terrible implements of war.. it is another story.

A few farmers with bolt guns can be crushed in any serious engagement, whatever crap has been spread around about resistance to tyranny. They are not an obstacle, they are not a source of fear.

Hell, have you considered that the bolt action rifles you fellows claim will work so well for "sniper" roles will not penetrate the body armor of average soldiers as it presently stands? We're forbidden "armor piercing" ammunition for our own good, of course. I know, I know, head shots... On a running target that is shooting back from an unknown distance. It sounds a hell of a lot easier then it actually is. Whats more, helmet protection is advancing along with everything else.

In 20 years, who knows what technology will bring along. We could have body armor that is completely impenetrable to the weapons we are presently using. They already have liquid spray on body armor... they already have devices that can detect and triangulate the exact location of a gunshot.

Can you imagine what 20 years will bring? We are being held in a state of technological homeostasis by our generous benefactors in government. While we send in our dues to the NRA, we do nothing but sustain the status quo. It is a losing proposition.
 
As technology advances, we need to stockpile knowledge and tooling. We may not be allowed to make any of the good stuff. but nothing stops us from having a private machine shop, and a working understanding of the latest weaponry.
 
Militia" doesn't mean "Timothy McVeigh and friends." It means a real, official, citizen army.
Click to expand...
You are correct sir!!

The anwers are in right in front of us......along.

The federal Govt is just to big. Both parties both make it grow and grow. I dont know if Illegal Imigration will cause states to reeval the logic of having the Feds rule over them or not.Clearly we have collectively dropped Federalism in our current american language.

The States may have to break away from the union to save it. This might be generations away from us. But clearly this trend towards collectivism/centralized planning is growing. The disconnect continues to grow. The Bill of Rights will get more narrowlly defined...by the Govt.(Courts)


Having a true citizen army will IMHO crub this "world cop" crap. The only way I would agree being a member of this true citizen army (like the swiss) is if we have foreign polices.....like the swiss. What I mean by that is, the true citizen army would be for protecting the home land......HERE AT HOME(The best defense is the best offense). and Not to use used and abused by some adminstrations "conflict" over....whatever. I will protect my farm, my liberties...but NOT on an oil field....half the world away.
 
Last edited:
It means a real, official, citizen army.
Click to expand...
The US Congress has decreed & defined an "unorganized militia". Care to address that, particularly the presumed responsibility of members thereof to arm & train themselves? DCM/CMP seems pretty minimal in that regard, esp. as they just ran out of guns to distribute - and those being antiques.

Its absurd for a bunch of farmers with bolt guns to claim parity to modern forces armed with tanks, artillery, air support, not to mention the numerous layers of support and logistics that go behind all of these things...
Click to expand...
Not absurd, for reasons in your own sentence: all that heavy firepower requires layers of vulnerable logistics to operate.

As one wag put it: tank drivers gotta get out and pee sometime.
 
Not absurd, for reasons in your own sentence: all that heavy firepower requires layers of vulnerable logistics to operate.

As one wag put it: tank drivers gotta get out and pee sometime.
Click to expand...

You think I havent heard this platitude before?

In Iraq we had people who tried that crap. A couple of goons with SVD's thinks they can sneak up on a bradley or an Abrams, whack the TC or driver, and then just roll off all happy go lucky?

You think those tanks are gonna just sit there and wait until somebody can take a cheap shot at the driver or TC? No... those beasts are going to be rolling around... blowing up your buddies or maybe rolling over your house.

We have this invention called themals... If the gunner or TC is doing their job, he'll be looking through them. You can pick up a person's body heat not matter how well camoflaged he is.

All of that is missing the point: The 2nd amendment is meant to be a protection by intimidation power as well as actual fighting parity. Because we possess weapons which would make any tyrannical attempt to oppress the people prohibitively costly, such a thing would never occur, is the idea.

A few dudes with sniper rifles are a nuisance when looking at the big picture. They do not hold territory. They do not fight pitched battles. They cannot, in other words, take or hold ground at their own choosing...

That is no way to win a war.
 
I wasn't talking a few. I was talking a significant percentage of the population.
I wasn't talking casualty-free victory by the locals. Heavy losses are a given.
I wasn't talking heavy equipment being entirely useless. A major army figures your position, you're toast.

I didn't miss the point.
Because we possess weapons which would make any tyrannical attempt to oppress the people prohibitively costly
Click to expand...
You got the point.
 
If the unthinkable like that happened, yes any organized group in a specified location could be wiped out. The fact that the revolutionaries are interlaced with the rest of the population poses the problem. The .gov wouldn't start bombing or nuking major cities to get the revolutionaries. Heck they won't even do that in Iraq.
I'd hope our troops and commanders would have a serious problem with fighting their own families and neighbors and tell the gov't to shove their roundup order where the sun don't shine. What are the big wigs going to do? Fire you? Come down and personally kick your posterior? I don't think so.
 
I think the growing disconnect btwn "the people" and "the state" grows......


Theres a quiet awe at the power of these weapon systems, hearing just what they could do. Theres also a quiet moment wondering how free people can control such beasts if they where ever turned on us.
and tinfoil is just not my style.........
 
FTR, the US did not defeat the British in the War of Independence using guerilla tactics. General Washington and his subordinates trained the Continental Army in the accepted military tactics of the day. He took a ragtag collection of militias and made them into a functioning army. Oh, and there was also this other country called France that offered assistance in various ways.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top