Realistic revolution... - Page 7
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Discussion Forums > Survival & Sustenance Living Forum > Realistic revolution...

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-11-2013, 09:29 PM   #61
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,681
Liked 1096 Times on 606 Posts
Likes Given: 455

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TLuker View Post
I understand the politics of the time and all of the things people were out ragged by. I just don't get Kent state being an issue? For me that was never a political thing it was always a common sense thing, and those students were obviously lacking in that. As for the innocent by standers, don't stand around while stupid people are screwing with people with guns.
TLuker,

When the people the Army kills are their future officer candidates, not because they were part of the protest but because they were walking between classes, can you see how that could be a problem if you did that often enough?

If there's no foreign invasion or massive civil unrest, then a college campus is not a place you need to deploy an infantry unit to. Infantry units only have one purpose- close with and kill the enemy in close combat.

I kinda expect the people in the military to be mature enough to understand that they don't need to fire their rifles at unarmed students. That "common sense" thing you noted should apply to people on both ends of a rifle.
__________________
kbd512 is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2013, 10:07 PM   #62
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
robocop10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Austin,Texas, by God!!
Posts: 10,064
Liked 2733 Times on 1431 Posts
Likes Given: 231

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TLuker View Post
I wasn't around when Kent state happened but that whole thing just confuses the hell out of me. The kids are always portrayed as the victims but I've never understood that. They were trying to vandalize an ROTC building and they were screwing with people that had guns. What did they think happened when you screw with people with guns? Did they think flowers were going to come out of those barrels?

For me this isn't any sort of political thing. It's a common sense thing. Don't throw rocks at people with guns.
Don't try to destroy property that is being protected by people with guns.
Don't make people with guns feel like they are trapped by a mob.
Don't look shocked if someone gets shot while screwing with people with guns.

I don't think I'll ever understand what everyone was out raged by. I'm out raged that kids that stupid where in college. I had pretty much figured out that you don't screw with people with guns by elementary school. Those were college kids and they didn't know that????
Kids (under 25) then and now have no concept of mortality. "Nothing bad can happen to me". Why do you think the X-games are so popular? Let it all hang out, dude. I remember the concept "Live fast, die young, leave a good looking corpse." With society protecting people from danger and pain, this will only get worse. If you had any sense at all, you would wear your seat belt. It only took one time bouncing yor face off the pre-Nader steel dash board to teach you that lesson. You drove with some degree of care because if you wrecked, you would be hurt. Pain was very real. Now with cars equipped with every conceivable location protected by crumple zones, padding and air bags, you can slam head on into a semi and walk away. What is the motivation to be cautious? Insurance, mommy and daddy and the civil courts will take care of it and may even make you rich as a result.
__________________

In life, strive to take the high road....It offers a better field of fire.
"Robo is right" Fuzzball

robocop10mm is offline  
kbd512 Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-11-2013, 10:16 PM   #63
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
clr8ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: South Central NH
Posts: 3,267
Liked 984 Times on 649 Posts
Likes Given: 632

Default

Quote:
Or will America just sit back and let the tyranny kick in?
That right there I think is the most likely scenario. The govt. isn't stupid. (!!??) They know that if they push too hard all at once, people will get uppity. They will just chip slowly at it. Now, if something were to happen that they had no control or lost control over, that would be different. You've heard of the frog in the water pot, ya?

But even if they DID say incarcerate a certain religion, or race, or take away an amendment, as long as it didn't involve people not being able to use a cell phone, or the internet, or Facebook, we'd all probably just shrug, and bang out another text message.
__________________
clr8ter is online now  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2013, 05:42 AM   #64
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
TLuker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: S.C.
Posts: 2,647
Liked 1225 Times on 790 Posts
Likes Given: 2468

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbd512 View Post
TLuker,

When the people the Army kills are their future officer candidates, not because they were part of the protest but because they were walking between classes, can you see how that could be a problem if you did that often enough?

If there's no foreign invasion or massive civil unrest, then a college campus is not a place you need to deploy an infantry unit to. Infantry units only have one purpose- close with and kill the enemy in close combat.

I kinda expect the people in the military to be mature enough to understand that they don't need to fire their rifles at unarmed students. That "common sense" thing you noted should apply to people on both ends of a rifle.
I could be mistaken on this one, but my understanding is that the troops were national guard's men which are called in for civil unrest. They accidentally got trapped in a fenced in area and couldn't get out because of the students screwing with them. Given the outcome I'm guessing it was an intense situation and they felt threatened? Which brings me back to my original statement, don't screw with people with guns. Don't make people with guns feel threatened in an intense situation, and if you do expect to get shot. That is not a political statement. It is a common sense one.
__________________
TLuker is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-2013, 08:39 AM   #65
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,681
Liked 1096 Times on 606 Posts
Likes Given: 455

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TLuker View Post
I could be mistaken on this one, but my understanding is that the troops were national guard's men which are called in for civil unrest. They accidentally got trapped in a fenced in area and couldn't get out because of the students screwing with them. Given the outcome I'm guessing it was an intense situation and they felt threatened? Which brings me back to my original statement, don't screw with people with guns. Don't make people with guns feel threatened in an intense situation, and if you do expect to get shot. That is not a political statement. It is a common sense one.
A trained military unit couldn't figure out how to get off-campus?

I guess it's a darn good thing they didn't have to navigate any jungles in Viet Nam.

Why bother to show up if you're not going to do the job right? Hell, even if they just showed up because they wanted to shoot some hippies, at least make sure you're shooting hippies instead of your future officer candidates.

What crime were the students walking between classes guilty of that warranted their execution?

Could the students have shot at our soldiers and use that "wrong time, wrong place" or "I felt threatened" excuse?

Intentionally shooting indiscriminately into a crowd of unarmed people comes awfully close to the dictionary definition of murder.

If your son or daughter was on-campus and someone started shooting into his or her classroom and killed him or her because "they felt threatened" by someone in that classroom or even a group of people in that classroom, would that be okay with you?

My statements are not political, either. Whether common sense or not, shooting someone in the process of walking between classes is most definitely NOT okay in my book.
__________________
kbd512 is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2013, 03:17 AM   #66
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
TLuker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: S.C.
Posts: 2,647
Liked 1225 Times on 790 Posts
Likes Given: 2468

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbd512 View Post
A trained military unit couldn't figure out how to get off-campus?

I guess it's a darn good thing they didn't have to navigate any jungles in Viet Nam.

Why bother to show up if you're not going to do the job right? Hell, even if they just showed up because they wanted to shoot some hippies, at least make sure you're shooting hippies instead of your future officer candidates.

What crime were the students walking between classes guilty of that warranted their execution?

Could the students have shot at our soldiers and use that "wrong time, wrong place" or "I felt threatened" excuse?

Intentionally shooting indiscriminately into a crowd of unarmed people comes awfully close to the dictionary definition of murder.

If your son or daughter was on-campus and someone started shooting into his or her classroom and killed him or her because "they felt threatened" by someone in that classroom or even a group of people in that classroom, would that be okay with you?

My statements are not political, either. Whether common sense or not, shooting someone in the process of walking between classes is most definitely NOT okay in my book.
You're missing the point. It doesn't matter if the shooters were right, wrong, crazy, mad, scarred, dumb, or whatever. It doesn't matter if it was ok or not. The point is they have the guns don't screw with them. It could have been the Manson family, KKK members, black panthers, or just some hippies on a bad trip. If they are armed don't screw with them and then act shocked because people got shot. Don't throw rocks at them, don't throw their tear gas canisters back at them, and don't be anywhere near where that is happening.

From Wiki:
"Some of the students who were shot had been protesting against the Cambodian Campaign, which President Richard Nixon announced during a television address on April 30. Other students who were shot had been walking nearby or observing the protest from a distance.[6][7]"

That wasn't just some out of the blue random act of violence. It was an escalation in violence that started with students trashing the town a few days before. It ended with students screwing with people with guns. I'm not saying anyone was right or wrong here on either side. I'm saying one side was incredibly stupid and the outcome was anything but shocking.
__________________
TLuker is offline  
clr8ter Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2013, 04:23 AM   #67
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: The Edge of Darkness
Posts: 6,495
Liked 4790 Times on 2679 Posts
Likes Given: 1736

Default

The Founding Fathers were aware that politicians in the New Republic would at some point only protect their own interest. In the Constitution they placed Article 5 Part II. This allows for a Federalist block of Stateism. The States were given the right to over ride Federal controls. The old sick aged lawyers who rarely know what day it is rule as the Supreme Court. They are violating the Constitution. The two political parties have blended it will be up to the Governors to save the Democracy.

__________________
nitestalker is offline  
Anna_Purna Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2013, 11:40 AM   #68
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
clr8ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: South Central NH
Posts: 3,267
Liked 984 Times on 649 Posts
Likes Given: 632

Default

I think TLukers "Don't screw with people that have guns" is pretty spot-on. Wether it was right, wrong, etc., is another discussion.

__________________
clr8ter is online now  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2013, 02:44 PM   #69
Lifetime Supporting Member
FTF_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
Vikingdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains,CA
Posts: 13,963
Liked 8271 Times on 4780 Posts
Likes Given: 10695

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TLuker View Post
You're missing the point. It doesn't matter if the shooters were right, wrong, crazy, mad, scarred, dumb, or whatever. It doesn't matter if it was ok or not. The point is they have the guns don't screw with them. It could have been the Manson family, KKK members, black panthers, or just some hippies on a bad trip. If they are armed don't screw with them and then act shocked because people got shot. Don't throw rocks at them, don't throw their tear gas canisters back at them, and don't be anywhere near where that is happening.

From Wiki:
"Some of the students who were shot had been protesting against the Cambodian Campaign, which President Richard Nixon announced during a television address on April 30. Other students who were shot had been walking nearby or observing the protest from a distance.[6][7]"

That wasn't just some out of the blue random act of violence. It was an escalation in violence that started with students trashing the town a few days before. It ended with students screwing with people with guns. I'm not saying anyone was right or wrong here on either side. I'm saying one side was incredibly stupid and the outcome was anything but shocking.
Under your premise then if the protestors had set up camp in the first days of the protesting and had been carrying guns, then the NG should not have entered into the battlefield.

If that is the premise then the Government would not have tried to enter the Branch Davidian compound.

Or apprehend the Weaver family.

And the British would not have tried to supress the Revolution.

My point is that might does not always make right. The Guard was criminally wrong here. They were the ones (looking back on it through the lens of written history) who screwed up. Lethal force was not justified!!!!!
__________________

Shoot me an email at vikingdad995@gmail.com

Check out the Firearmstalk Podcasts with Vikingdad and DrFootball! https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/firearms-talk-podcast/id778007899

Quote:
"Among the many misdeeds of British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest."
- Mohandas Gandhi, an Autobiography, page 446.
Vikingdad is online now  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2013, 03:59 PM   #70
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
clr8ter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: South Central NH
Posts: 3,267
Liked 984 Times on 649 Posts
Likes Given: 632

Default

Quote:
My point is that might does not always make right. The Guard was criminally wrong here. They were the ones (looking back on it through the lens of written history) who screwed up. Lethal force was not justified!!!!!
I would tend to agree with this, but I think the "don't screw with people with guns" thing is coming from the perspective of the people with the guns are the govt., and right or wrong, there is usually (IMHO), little or no repercussions to what they do. Unlike us. We're in a different category.

Maybe "people" in the above statement should be changed to "govt.". At least as it applies here.
__________________
clr8ter is online now  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Realistic value of gun eeder General Shotgun Discussion 1 06-19-2012 03:57 AM
CCW Practice and preparation...How realistic do you get? BenLuby Concealed Carrying & Personal Protection 6 10-04-2011 06:22 PM
i need some mannequins for realistic training james_black Training & Safety 10 02-15-2010 12:15 AM
Lets talk realistic ideas... painted_klown Politics, Religion and Controversy 36 11-10-2008 04:21 PM
Realistic Accuracy NelsonMuntz Competition Shooting 17 08-10-2008 11:43 PM