Subject:
|
Re: guns, guns, guns (was: demographics (was: My Gun Control Rant))
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 15 Jan 2001 12:07:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1139 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> Most modern Armies are trained in urban clearance - it is a key part of
> modern warfare. Personally, I fail to see how a bunch of out to shape middle
> aged men can put up any sort of credible resistance, with small arms,
> against a well trained military. To me, the notion that a man with pistol
> can put up anything more than a token resistance is absurd.
Who is it that you think is out of shape and middle aged? Similarly, who is it
that you think only has pistols? In the US, it is easy to acquire military
ordnance that "fell of a truck." While I have never engaged in such
transactions, of course, I have been aware of the possibility to purchase (at
what I would call reasonable prices) modern military machine guns, hand
grenades, and anti-personnel mines. If little ole suburban _me_ has that kind
of exposure, then how much serious hardware must be out there and available?
Also, I think that you are wrongly discounting what numbers and home-turf
familiarity can mean during a skirmish.
> Naturally, all that assumes that the military would not divide. If it did
> divide, the gun owning populous would be even more ineffectual.
Unless I'm missing your point, this seems patently wrong. Assuming that the
military split because one side agreed with the revolutionaries, then they
would act as adjunct forces, synergistically augmenting their strengths.
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
188 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
