Comments on: those who learn from the past

By: Linoge

Linoge — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 22:08:13 +0000

Hell, every tyranny in history has had to disarm their subjects in order to ensure their success, and those that did not do so have failed miserably (see American Revolution).
I will certainly admit that our glorious President seems to be taking things a little slow these days, but only an idiot will believe that pace will hold for the entire four years.

By: dirtcrashr

dirtcrashr — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 14:20:17 +0000

He’s a Fabian, small-s socialist who sees getting his machine up and running in an incremental way – but once up and running with all its bits in place, command-and-control of the financial side including insurance, industries at his beck and call, and ACORN ensuring that the votes fall where they need to – oh what a sight it will be.
Examples of tyrannies disarming people in order to effect complete compliance goes way back before the 20th Century.

By: Linoge

Linoge — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 21:35:09 +0000

Dave - I completely agree, I just wanted to point out, to those who would believe otherwise, that armed civilians can and have overcome superior military forces, even in the recent past. MikeB - Do I think that there will be sweeping legislation banning any and all firearms in America in one fell swoop? No. Do I think that the government (especially the current government, under the most anti-gun President in history) will do its best to nip and nibble and snipe away at various aspects of firearm ownership, like what Michael suggests? Absolutely. And every last one of those small infractions will be under the guise of "reasonable legislation", "common-sense controls", and other such buzzwords/phrases that people like you are so fond of misusing. Mature governments exist to do one thing, and one thing only - control their people. Firearms only allow for so much control, and thus run contrary to the purpose of mature governments. You do the math. Of course, you have already admitted to being incapable of accurately determining facts, so I might just have to spell the situation out for you... and you still probably will not get it. Pistolero - Very accurate, that. Despite being outnumbered and armed with equipment that was, at best, equivalent to that the British used, our forefathers were able to beat back an occupying force due to the use of revolutionary (harhar) tactics and strategies (namely, not lining up across the field from the other guy and exchanging volleys).

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:08:06 +0000

I don’t believe they will take our guns away,but to take everything else away first. Limit the amount of ammo,the size of the magazine , spare parts…stuff like that will happen first.
This way we will not have the ability to fight back due to effective limitations.

By: mikeb302000

mikeb302000 — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:07:23 +0000

Linoge,
I realize there are 20th centuries examples of tyrannies that have arranged to have the people disarmed and then did their bad business, but do you really think that is a possibility in the 21st century USA?

By: the pistolero

the pistolero — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:38:46 +0000

There are no obsolete weapons…only obsolete tactics & strategies.

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 20:06:22 +0000

I’ll table the discussion about whether it is possible, or likely or anything else. Fact of the matter is it is our right to have the tools at hand to try. The possibility of success in that hypothetical scenario is not relevant.
People with minority political views that have zero chance of being represented don’t lose their freedom of speech because it is unlikely to have an effect. Same thing here.