RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines

RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DomKen -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/16/2013 2:55:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Moving the goal posts isn't going to make your assertion about the military committing mass mutiny any more likely. Why would they risk a firing squad? There is nothing to suggest that today's military will be any more reluctant to repeat history and attack their countrymen and women than in the past. Again, read up on OOTW. Every time a service member goes through an exercise, they are practicing to do something expressly forbidden by federal law and military regs... turn their weapons against civilians and act as law enforcement in the case of a US insurgency. I didn't move any goal posts. I said the US military cannot be relied upon to attack the US civilian population because of the certainty of mutiny not due to the presence of rifles in the hands of the civilian population and I still do. At Kent St. less than one third of the NG troops actually fired, and less than 100 rounds were fired total, which shows that even conscript forces wouldn't do it. The all volunteer force of todays would almost certainly not have fired at all. Actually my OOTW training taught me to fight forest fires and respond to hurricanes not to shoot peaceful demonstrators. You see I'm a veteran and your claims that people like me would turn our weapons against our friends and neighbors is ridiculous beyond measure.

Powergamz1 -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/16/2013 6:35:15 AM)
If you went through the same training as everyone else (instead of being in some sooper seekrit unit), then your OOTW also covered urban warfare, removing civilian law enforcement, clearing domiciles, practice for rounding up large number of civilians under martial law, etc. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/100-15/Ch9.htm And the sovereign citizen's fantasy that enough of the military would mutiny to make a difference is proven laughable by the real world, and by history. At Kent State, zero percent of the troops mutinied, even while 67 rounds were being fired. quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Moving the goal posts isn't going to make your assertion about the military committing mass mutiny any more likely. Why would they risk a firing squad? There is nothing to suggest that today's military will be any more reluctant to repeat history and attack their countrymen and women than in the past. Again, read up on OOTW. Every time a service member goes through an exercise, they are practicing to do something expressly forbidden by federal law and military regs... turn their weapons against civilians and act as law enforcement in the case of a US insurgency. I didn't move any goal posts. I said the US military cannot be relied upon to attack the US civilian population because of the certainty of mutiny not due to the presence of rifles in the hands of the civilian population and I still do. At Kent St. less than one third of the NG troops actually fired, and less than 100 rounds were fired total, which shows that even conscript forces wouldn't do it. The all volunteer force of todays would almost certainly not have fired at all. Actually my OOTW training taught me to fight forest fires and respond to hurricanes not to shoot peaceful demonstrators. You see I'm a veteran and your claims that people like me would turn our weapons against our friends and neighbors is ridiculous beyond measure.

BamaD -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/16/2013 3:06:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl For those who need a clickable link http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa46.htm thank you

jlf1961 -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/16/2013 3:15:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Moving the goal posts isn't going to make your assertion about the military committing mass mutiny any more likely. Why would they risk a firing squad? There is nothing to suggest that today's military will be any more reluctant to repeat history and attack their countrymen and women than in the past. Again, read up on OOTW. Every time a service member goes through an exercise, they are practicing to do something expressly forbidden by federal law and military regs... turn their weapons against civilians and act as law enforcement in the case of a US insurgency. I didn't move any goal posts. I said the US military cannot be relied upon to attack the US civilian population because of the certainty of mutiny not due to the presence of rifles in the hands of the civilian population and I still do. At Kent St. less than one third of the NG troops actually fired, and less than 100 rounds were fired total, which shows that even conscript forces wouldn't do it. The all volunteer force of todays would almost certainly not have fired at all. Actually my OOTW training taught me to fight forest fires and respond to hurricanes not to shoot peaceful demonstrators. You see I'm a veteran and your claims that people like me would turn our weapons against our friends and neighbors is ridiculous beyond measure. Since any attempt by a President to declare martial law and suspend basic human rights would probably cause a lot of problems in the Military, not to mention that it is illegal for US troops to be deployed on American soil except in defense of the country by foreign invaders. So if the President deployed US troops to deal with civil unrest following the suspension of civil liberties and declaration of martial law, I figure less than a third would follow orders to shoot American civilians.

Nosathro -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/16/2013 3:17:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: papassion The intent of the founding fathers wiith the 2nd amendment was so the people could defend themselves against an oppressive government. The government at that time had muskets and the people had muskets. Now the government has has high capacity weapons, thus the people need high capacity weapons to defend themselves from an oppressive government. What chance would the general population have against the government forces? First, Let me tell you a story about how a small group of fighters with old ak-47s and homemade ordinance have been holding back the mightyist army in the world in Iraq and ahganistan, for what, 13 YEARS now? Ever heard of the taliban? or other SMALL groups? They kicked the Russian's mighty military ass too! and second, half or more of the soldiers in the military would not follow orders to shoot civilians and would, in fact, sabatoge military communications, etc. The military could NOT, repeat, NOT ever win against the people. And they KNOW it! One point, the US armed the Taliban...with such thing as Stinger Missles..

Nosathro -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/16/2013 3:22:40 PM)
I must say there are those so sure of their facts...kinda reminds me of the Chicago Tribune front page article announcing Thomas Dewey winning the Presidental election over Harry Truman.

jlf1961 -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/16/2013 3:25:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: papassion The intent of the founding fathers wiith the 2nd amendment was so the people could defend themselves against an oppressive government. The government at that time had muskets and the people had muskets. Now the government has has high capacity weapons, thus the people need high capacity weapons to defend themselves from an oppressive government. What chance would the general population have against the government forces? First, Let me tell you a story about how a small group of fighters with old ak-47s and homemade ordinance have been holding back the mightyist army in the world in Iraq and ahganistan, for what, 13 YEARS now? Ever heard of the taliban? or other SMALL groups? They kicked the Russian's mighty military ass too! and second, half or more of the soldiers in the military would not follow orders to shoot civilians and would, in fact, sabatoge military communications, etc. The military could NOT, repeat, NOT ever win against the people. And they KNOW it! One point, the US armed the Taliban...with such thing as Stinger Missles.. The United States armed the Mujahedin with stinger missiles, not the Taliban. In point of fact the "freedom" fighters that eventually became the Taliban came from parts of Afghanistan that the US government could not get support from, and from Pakistan. There were a few army instructors teaching the Mujahedin how to use the weapon systems, along with the CIA and civilian contractors. I love revisionist history.

LookieNoNookie -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/16/2013 6:38:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterG2kTR Higher capacity magazines unnecessary. Follow the sniper motto....one shot..one kill. She needs to aim better. High capacity magazines only allow publishers to put more subscription cards in 'em.

BamaD -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/16/2013 7:37:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: papassion The intent of the founding fathers wiith the 2nd amendment was so the people could defend themselves against an oppressive government. The government at that time had muskets and the people had muskets. Now the government has has high capacity weapons, thus the people need high capacity weapons to defend themselves from an oppressive government. What chance would the general population have against the government forces? First, Let me tell you a story about how a small group of fighters with old ak-47s and homemade ordinance have been holding back the mightyist army in the world in Iraq and ahganistan, for what, 13 YEARS now? Ever heard of the taliban? or other SMALL groups? They kicked the Russian's mighty military ass too! and second, half or more of the soldiers in the military would not follow orders to shoot civilians and would, in fact, sabatoge military communications, etc. The military could NOT, repeat, NOT ever win against the people. And they KNOW it! One point, the US armed the Taliban...with such thing as Stinger Missles.. The United States armed the Mujahedin with stinger missiles, not the Taliban. In point of fact the "freedom" fighters that eventually became the Taliban came from parts of Afghanistan that the US government could not get support from, and from Pakistan. There were a few army instructors teaching the Mujahedin how to use the weapon systems, along with the CIA and civilian contractors. I love revisionist history. Don't forget that the shelf life on those stingers was on the verge of experation when we gave them to the Mujahedin so there was little danger of them falling into the wrong hands and being used against us.

BamaD -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/16/2013 7:39:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: papassion The intent of the founding fathers wiith the 2nd amendment was so the people could defend themselves against an oppressive government. The government at that time had muskets and the people had muskets. Now the government has has high capacity weapons, thus the people need high capacity weapons to defend themselves from an oppressive government. What chance would the general population have against the government forces? First, Let me tell you a story about how a small group of fighters with old ak-47s and homemade ordinance have been holding back the mightyist army in the world in Iraq and ahganistan, for what, 13 YEARS now? Ever heard of the taliban? or other SMALL groups? They kicked the Russian's mighty military ass too! and second, half or more of the soldiers in the military would not follow orders to shoot civilians and would, in fact, sabatoge military communications, etc. The military could NOT, repeat, NOT ever win against the people. And they KNOW it! One point, the US armed the Taliban...with such thing as Stinger Missles.. The United States armed the Mujahedin with stinger missiles, not the Taliban. In point of fact the "freedom" fighters that eventually became the Taliban came from parts of Afghanistan that the US government could not get support from, and from Pakistan. There were a few army instructors teaching the Mujahedin how to use the weapon systems, along with the CIA and civilian contractors. I love revisionist history. Without revisionist history some people would know no history at all.

TricklessMagic -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/19/2013 8:29:35 AM)
Something I always find interesting is the idea of Americans taking on the military. That is an absolutely horrible idea. The better option is to go after the liberal and progressive constituency. Avoid the military, target the civilians. Americans would only have to take out a few states full of liberals before everyone would come to the table to talk peace. Thirty thousand Iraqis with small arms had the liberals and progressives scream for surrender. What about fourteen million, a minimum, decentralized executioners randomly eliminating liberals and progressives mixed with terror campaigns on liberal and progressive disease nests. Guns are not the answer. The use of guns to win back liberty is a horrible idea. Guns in the minds of liberals and progressives are finite, easy to seize and throw into the waste bin of history. We must also remember that "liberals" and "progressives" will quickly feed on one another once their soft lives have been removed. The lowly and worthless masses inhabiting our cities will rise up and seek to consume their once fellow supporters and welfare doll providers. The lack of modern comforts would have to be prolonged. Emergency supplies to the cities would have to be cut and collaborators and their families eliminated. Companies attempting to help the city inhabitants would have to be attacked and destroyed. Not politicians but their supporters and the supporters' infrastructure would have to be regularly attacked as well. A ready and frequent wave of violence against the left, the progressives, brutal murder and rape campaigns against the liberals and progressives would quickly change the attitude of the enemies of liberty. Also cities and their infrastructure would have to be destroyed like power grids, water supplies, bridges, etc. etc. etc.. The great plus of it to ensure ease is that most liberals and progressives supposedly don't own guns, and the cities in which many of them reside don't let the people be free because the people are seemingly murder prone dangerous scum (I'm just going by what I see in the laws). Don't fight the military, attack the root of the problem. They can't take away all of the hammers, ice picks, gas cans, garden fertilizer, safety matches, cars (you know steal one and run liberals and progressives off the road, collateral damage be damned), urine (because you can make red phosphorus [becomes white phosphorous when lit aflame] from it using methods perfected in the seventeenth century) etc. etc. etc.. I figure after a few million dead liberals and progressives along with ruined cities at the seats of liberal and progressive powers, peace and liberty could be ensured for generations to come. And the boon would be the liberals and progressives would then want guns for themselves to protect themselves against the champions of liberty. Now I don't believe in violence and it should never be an answer. We should all be kind people so long as the rule of law holds and liberty survives as it currently does. But it's effectiveness cannot be denied. Let us hope liberty survives and there is no need for violence. Pray for peace. Prepare for war. Oh and bury your good rifles deep, use nitrogen powder and ball bearing grease.

tazzygirl -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/19/2013 8:56:08 AM)
~chuckles Its obvious you are new around this section. You will find very few are "liberals" or "progressives" as you describe them. But you do paint a nice fantasy world. Hoping for your own version of utopia?

jlf1961 -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/19/2013 8:57:44 AM)
Actually violence is always the answer. Consider the Carthaginians, violence pretty much answered that quite effectively. Consider Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, again violence settled their situation. Throughout history, violence has settled many an argument. It is an unfortunate cosmic truth, humans are extremely violent animals.

jlf1961 -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/19/2013 10:32:11 AM)
[image]https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/47021_10151241939478963_1241021333_n.jpg[/image]

tazzygirl -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/19/2013 12:32:56 PM)
Can someone show me where in the Constitution it says a state cannot make laws?

LookieNoNookie -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/19/2013 2:23:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl We know... there is a thread already about this incident. And you are assuming she would have needed more to save her and the kids lives. It could just as easily be assumed that while one was being shot the other would have ran. Its a good thing she had that gun. Its a good thing he did as most robbers do these days and rang the door bell, giving her time to get the gun from the safe and them get to safety. Its also a good thing that the kids' last memory of that man was of him still being alive... for the mother as well. "run".

jlf1961 -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/19/2013 2:36:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Can someone show me where in the Constitution it says a state cannot make laws? They can make laws. I have no problem with states making laws, I just reserve the right of saying that some of the laws made are stupid. Now I am going to bottom line this argument. We need high cap magazines to prepare for the Zombie Apocalypse. Zombies will not wait while we reload. If not zombies, then with the current restrictions on how many deer that can be taken in hunting season and the booming population growth of deer, they are going to be attacking human population centers in great numbers soon. What about the possibility of an alien invasion? Granted we may just piss em off with our primitive weapons, but not all of us are as smart as tazzy who is hell bent on developing the world's first hand held repeating rail gun.[:D]

Ronnie1986 -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/19/2013 6:05:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Moving the goal posts isn't going to make your assertion about the military committing mass mutiny any more likely. Why would they risk a firing squad? There is nothing to suggest that today's military will be any more reluctant to repeat history and attack their countrymen and women than in the past. totally agree with this.. i laugh everytime i hear people say that our troops wouldnt follow orders..

DesideriScuri -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/19/2013 7:26:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ronnie1986 quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Moving the goal posts isn't going to make your assertion about the military committing mass mutiny any more likely. Why would they risk a firing squad? There is nothing to suggest that today's military will be any more reluctant to repeat history and attack their countrymen and women than in the past. totally agree with this.. i laugh everytime i hear people say that our troops wouldnt follow orders.. So, there are no "free thinkers" in our military? Only mindless robots? Yes, some will obey orders, regardless of what those orders are, or what they think is right/wrong. There will also be some that won't obey orders to fire on American Citizens. Regardless, it will be ugly, brutal, bloody, and will mar our history. I would much rather take this route, though, than TricklessMagic's ideas.

jlf1961 -> RE: Why people support higher capacity magazines (1/19/2013 7:48:41 PM)
[image]https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/71806_324938254283059_1132063070_n.png[/image]

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625