Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > What would happen if "they" banned the ar 15 rifles?

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-31-2013, 10:24 PM   #101
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 34
Liked 5 Times on 4 Posts
Likes Given: 7

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattShlock

Confusing to be sure. Your colonial math is off by a factor of ten.
Haha you're right. Sorry about that. I t would be 10%. Let that be a lesson to check your math work twice.
__________________

Last edited by Buskowski; 03-31-2013 at 10:26 PM.
Buskowski is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 02:27 AM   #102
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Tackleberry1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Vancouver,WA
Posts: 5,799
Liked 4544 Times on 2196 Posts
Likes Given: 1352

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus View Post
I have not seen any subjugation in this country, past or present, nor do I see it in the future.

But I can see a remote possibility of a small handful of extremist radical who will have little to no public support being wiped out in very short order.
You and I have already agreed to disagree on this topic. While I respect your long career in Law Enforcement I find your critical thinking skills lacking. Perhaps this is what happens to men who spent 40+ years saying "yes sir."

Tack
__________________
Tackleberry1 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 02:36 AM   #103
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
locutus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 8,780
Liked 5142 Times on 2932 Posts
Likes Given: 4356

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tackleberry1 View Post
You and I have already agreed to disagree on this topic. While I respect your long career in Law Enforcement I find your critical thinking skills lacking. Perhaps this is what happens to men who spent 40+ years saying "yes sir."

Tack

It was my impression that we had also agreed to forego personal insults.
__________________

"Politics is the art of the possible" Otto von Bismarck.

locutus is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 02:48 AM   #104
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Tackleberry1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Vancouver,WA
Posts: 5,799
Liked 4544 Times on 2196 Posts
Likes Given: 1352

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus View Post
It was my impression that we had also agreed to forego personal insults.
So... "extreme radical" was not directed at me?

If not, then your correct and I appologize.

Tack
__________________
Tackleberry1 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 03:00 AM   #105
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: The green, green grass of home.
Posts: 448
Liked 135 Times on 109 Posts
Likes Given: 38

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbd512 View Post
Has anyone seen the military patrolling American streets in their town lately? I live in Houston, and apart from recruiting offices, the military is nowhere to be found.

How about DHS or the BATFE? I see them at the airports and ports, but that's about it.

Last I checked, they were trying, however poorly or misguidedly, to prevent terrorist attacks and secure the borders.

Has the response been proportionate to the threat? Well, I don't think so and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in that opinion. No government solution to a problem will be perfect, but I think they are trying to address their shortcomings.

I've not seen or heard of any attempts to subvert the authority of our elected state and local officials or any attempt by the federal government to impose martial law or other authoritarian measures against state or municipal governments and their citizenry.

Some states have more restrictions than others regarding what weapons civilians can own (like AR-15's, for instance), and last I checked, this is in keeping with "state's rights" that so many in the midwest have ballyhooed about since Obama was elected president.

Increased taxation to support spending associated with wars, bail-outs, and government functions is not equivalent to tyranny. All of our officials who are responsible for appropriation of funds and legislation calling for increased taxation were democratically elected by, we the people.

If we don't want nationalized health care (our portion of the supposed "savings" cost us about $800 a month in extra taxes), increased government spending, or affronts to our personal liberties (like being permitted to own and use AR-15's, if we so choose to do so), then perhaps we should elect representatives who better represent our interests. Is it at all possible that the majority of the people agree with the decisions that our elected government have made? There's been little outcry over the increases in spending even though it will eventually put America out of business.

Why worry about what weapons you can have if you can't get a job commensurate with your skills? If you can't afford to drive to work every day, what good is national health care or "green" energy? What good does an AR-15 do when you don't have funding for prisons and criminals are not adequately prosecuted for the crimes they commit? Are you going to shoot everyone that does something you don't like?

Democracies tend to end in chaos or dictatorships, if the existing government is toppled, so what possible good will come of destroying our government and military just so we can all own AR-15's?
Let me not be an apologist for the current administration but rather be succinct: "hi kbd512, we're from the IRS and we're here to help you."
__________________
MattShlock is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 03:03 AM   #106
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
locutus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 8,780
Liked 5142 Times on 2932 Posts
Likes Given: 4356

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tackleberry1 View Post
So... "extreme radical" was not directed at me?

If not, then your correct and I appologize.

Tack

Not unless you intend to be out shooting at American troops.
__________________

"Politics is the art of the possible" Otto von Bismarck.

locutus is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 03:08 AM   #107
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Tackleberry1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Vancouver,WA
Posts: 5,799
Liked 4544 Times on 2196 Posts
Likes Given: 1352

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus View Post
Not unless you intend to be out shooting at American troops.
My only "intention" is to refuse to comply with any new GC Laws. Whether or not that leads to violence is not up to me...

Tack
__________________
Tackleberry1 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 03:11 AM   #108
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
locutus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 8,780
Liked 5142 Times on 2932 Posts
Likes Given: 4356

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tackleberry1 View Post
My only "intention" is to refuse to comply with any new GC Laws. Whether or not that leads to violence is not up to me...

Tack
Fair enough.
__________________

"Politics is the art of the possible" Otto von Bismarck.

locutus is offline  
Tackleberry1 Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 04:07 AM   #109
No Longer a NY Resident.
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
kfox75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Erie County PA,
Posts: 2,428
Liked 1489 Times on 913 Posts
Likes Given: 7328

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbd512 View Post
Nothing I pointed out is in any way unknown or mysterious to anyone in the military or law enforcement. One of the things you figure out pretty quick in the military is just how vulnerable you really are. Our military relies mostly on the notion that the people are on their side and no one would be stupid enough to attack a US military base. The thinking hasn't changed much since WWII and, unfortunately, has cost a lot of lives. Even the security after 9/11 was mostly more for show than to maintain capability.

I have emphatically attempted to dissuade people from carrying out such acts while pointing out that running around and shooting guys that rappel out of little black helicopters is not going to win a war against our government, which is exactly what's in store for us if thousands of gun owners decided to go march on DC while toting their rifles.

I tried to outline a few realistic and survivable tactics that a bunch of overweight and out of shape civilians with hunting rifles could possibly pull off in their wildest dreams while pointing out how low and unlikely any long term survivability actually is.

Until you have communications, air superiority, artillery and mortars, and perhaps a few combat vehicles you can expect to have your rear end handed to you in just about every engagement.

So, shooting at little black helicopters or little black clad men rappelling from little black helicopters is a really dumb idea. Putting holes through the engine intakes or exhausts while the little black helicopters are hovering or, preferably, on the ground is a much better idea.

The F-22 costs more than $250 million dollars, is incredibly fast, can evade the most modern sensor suites, and has considerable firepower- but one .50 caliber hole through either engine later and it's a paperweight. Every piece of military hardware, no matter how sophisticated or seemingly powerful, has its weak points and vulnerabilities.

Trust me, the government knows all of this already. If you ever bothered to pay attention to the force protection briefs while you were in (assuming you served in the military at some point in the past 10 years or so), you'd know that protection of assets and personnel is always on the unit commander's mind.

The government personnel who wear uniforms and/or badges are not the problem (at least not the overwhelming portion of the problem). The government personnel that wear suits, smile on TV while telling you about how they are going to rob you blind, and go around kissing babies are the ones that concern me the most.

I think lots of people "think out loud" about this because they really have no idea what they're actually contemplating doing or, quite possibly, because they're not firing on all cylinders.
I never served. Grew up on and off base, dad was a career man, USMC. Most of the time I just kept my mouth shut and my eyes open. Learned a lot that way. if not for the fact that I was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes at age 15, and had a complete knee replacement at age 18 due to a severe car wreck, I would have joined. It was something I wanted to for my country, and myself.

You do make some good points in both your other post and this one, and I can understand where you are coming from. You are right, the main threats to our freedom wear suits and ties, but they are also a threat to their own military and police forces throughout the country. I do think that too many folks out there are off about the number of LEOs and members of military units who will stand with them "On the side of good". Some over estimate, some underestimate. How many will change their minds when the SHTF in their home town? I think both sides will have some surprises coming at that point. Don't you?

The tinfoil hat comment was posted in jest. I meant no offense when I posted it, just did it for laughs.

P.S., If anyone wants a hint of how to "step up our response" , look up the Liberator .45. It worked as intended during WWII, and Something similar could be used if the need ever was to arise.
__________________

Is it better to do the right thing for the wrong reason, or to do the wrong thing for the right reason? If you do the wrong thing for the right reason, is it still the wrong thing?

Si vis pacem parabellum.

To those who wish to take away our Second Amendment rights. What will you do when we, all 100,000,000 of us, stand as one, and say no?

kfox75 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2013, 05:09 AM   #110
No Longer a NY Resident.
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
kfox75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Erie County PA,
Posts: 2,428
Liked 1489 Times on 913 Posts
Likes Given: 7328

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tackleberry1 View Post
My former MOS is clearly identified by my Avitar and all relevant tactics circle back to basic Infantry Common Tasks.

Nothing our troops have faced in sandbox would be relevant to an internal conflict in Conus.

Neither our military our US Law Enforcement have ever faced a situation on a land mass this size or against a population anywhere near the size of ours.

Complicating matters further is the compartmentalized structure of our government and society. Dictators with "absolute" authority can not hold power once a revolution has been sparked... How could anyone think the US Government could win given the hoops it must jump through to do anything?

Civil War would not be the correct term and in no way would it look like our last Civil War or even the War of Independance.

No... When it happens here, it will be fought in densely populated urban areas where insurgents can drop a weapon and blend into the population negating the Governments firepower advantage.

It will consist of a mixture of all walks of life and differing interest ranging from pure patriots to street gangs who's business gets interrupted by martial law... "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

Sporadic leaders will emerge who at time will lead larger style offensives with mixed success and sometimes heavy casualties... But everytime a man is killed, a son and 2 brothers will step into the fray to avenge him.

This is the nature of revolution and while technology changes, human nature does not, which is why we can predict eventual outcomes.

At the onset, the majority of any population supports the powers that be, due to there fear of upsetting the "status quo", but as time goes on, abuses mount, loved ones die, and hatred grows.

The blame for the carnage must land somewhere and the Central Government is the most obvious target, this would be exacerbated in our system by politicians of lower Governments looking for there "political advantage".

One need not be a Veteran to grasp these concepts... a study of human conflict, past revolutions, insurgent tactics, and cultural hatred combine to clearly lay out the path we are headed down.

Like any sane American, I too hope that I am wrong. I hope our leaders can put the county first and right this floundering ship and I hope my children and grandchildren get to grow up in the same peace we enjoyed...

However, peace will not be possible for any people who have subjugation forced upon them and millions are waking up to the notion that ALL of our liberties hinge on our guns and there continued "deterant presence" in our hands.

Tack
This ^^ is correct IMHO. That is what scares the S#!t out of me. I am not afraid of dying for the freedoms that are promised to ALL of us in the Constitution, however, I am one who would mourn the loss of so many good people who were just doing what they were told. It would be a war like no other has been, because our own citizens would be the innocents in the crossfire. This would happen in our own back yards, on our own streets, and in front of our children and grandchildren. We must all do what we have to to prevent this from happening, but not at the cost of our rights.

Some on here are saying "Over a rifle?". It is not over a rifle, it is over our right to defend ourselves, our life, liberty, and our ability to pursue our own happiness. Google some of the following things, and you will see how our 2A rights have been steped on in the last 100 years:

NFA '34
GCA '68
FOPA '86

We, as a country were divided on each of these, and the criminal actions of others are what cost us our rights to the firearms listed in these acts. Dos anyone on here really think that it will stop with ARs and AKs? Do you think that it will stop at a 10 round maximum? Especially with Cuomo, Obama, and Bloomberg out there pushing for more restrictions. Do we forget that several federal and state lawmakers have already publicly stated that they don't even want guns in the hands of the people who can LEGALLY own them? How will they take them if we all stand up and say NO, you can't have it. Their only choice is by force, and if it comes to that, do you really think they will pass up your guns just because they are bolt action relics? Some of the rifles used over in the sand box are some of those old Bolt action relics, so even those can be a threat.

I for one, am sick and tired of having to bow down to the governments actions FOOG, because someone else, who should not have had a gun in the first place committed a crime with a "certain Military Style Rifle". What's next? Will I have to put an ignition interlock on MY truck because my NEIGHBOR got a DWI? My question is, where do we, the citizens of the United States, draw the line? What more do we have to lose for all of us to stand together, and in one voice, say NO!

Sorry about thr rant, but some of us need to wake up before it's too late.
__________________

Is it better to do the right thing for the wrong reason, or to do the wrong thing for the right reason? If you do the wrong thing for the right reason, is it still the wrong thing?

Si vis pacem parabellum.

To those who wish to take away our Second Amendment rights. What will you do when we, all 100,000,000 of us, stand as one, and say no?

kfox75 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
What kind of semi-auto "assault rifles" are good to purchase for the regular joe? SubZero Auto & Semi-Auto Discussion 33 02-16-2013 09:42 PM
Details about Feinstein's new "Assault Weapons Ban" - affects more than rifles. TimL2952 Legal and Activism 5 12-28-2012 07:05 PM
Should "Assault Weapons" Be Banned (Vote) 10P8TRIOT Legal and Activism 24 08-07-2012 03:27 AM
The "Banned" SNL skit on the bailout Angeleyes Politics, Religion and Controversy 2 10-14-2008 01:28 PM
"If It's Happening Here, It Could Happen Down There" sculker The Club House 0 06-21-2008 07:29 PM