If anarchy breaks out in your country. What would you do?

Some of you may know that I frequently browse gun forums. About half of the people there are paranoid. Many of them have arsenals in case anarchy (rioting in the streets, invasion, biological weapons attack, looting that sort of thing) breaks out. They also have bug out bags with food, water, etc. Their "normal" shtf kit goes something like this

A rifle or shot gun(some both) the most popular seem to be an ar15 or ak47 and a remington 870.

A hand gun. These vary greatly most popular are, Sigs, glocks, Berettas, 1911s(to many brands to list for a 1911) or any double action revolver.

These guys are all pretty "extreme". Some of them claim to have places in the mountains to hide during an attack on the USA. And some are in Militias that drill for this sort of thing~:joker:


And I forgot they are all FAR right conservatives. With a few libertarians thrown in.


......................................


Any way that got me thinking. What would a liberal do if the shtf? Or a conservative who is not paranoid like them? Or what about a person in a country with no guns.


Me I really Don't know. Probably grab my service six(its a revolver), A couple hundred rounds of 38 special, some food and water and get the heck outa' dodge.

Run away. The nearest hills are the highlands, so that's about a 400 mile trek. So steal some good walking boots and some food. Maybe a fast car too.

In the extreme case that that hapens, just come on over to Canada. We're lonely up here. ~:mecry:

Another thing I think every one is going to say "head for the wilderness" but if every one does that won't there be some theft, fighting(Well shooting in the USA) spread of the disease(if there is one)

fight back and die honorably!
you may think this wierd, but then again, why in gods name would their be anarchy in the isle of man?

Re-watch The Road Warrior for inspiration.~:)

I thought there were no guns on the isle of man so how could you fight, with cricket bats and knives? This is why I wanted to know about the people in anti gun countries. How would they defend themselves from groups of people.

I'd probably be the one starting the Anarchy - so I'd just go with the flow.

there's a rifle club (that i'm part of) in every town, and alot of people own guns, it's just we have no permanant military presence and no armed police...we'd fight back, but it'd probably be a guerilla campaign

Ok I thought the Isle of man was like a minature UK.

Go crazy broadway style.

I would probably try to:
-organise my neighbours/anybody I can find.
-Find some weapons, probably at a military base (I assume the military is gone).
-Steal a ship, with help from my armed followers, and sail away to somewhere that is not in anarchy, like the Isle of Mann.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceasar010

I thought there were no guns on the isle of man so how could you fight, with cricket bats and knives? This is why I wanted to know about the people in anti gun countries. How would they defend themselves from groups of people.

---

be in a other group of peoples duh ~D or just :hide:

but i would :knight: :charge: :duel: till they :surrender:

but i'm just a :spammer:er

~:handball:

I`d raised an army and claimed myself king of Norway, then killed those who started the anarchy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceasar010

Ok I thought the Isle of man was like a minature UK.

---

Think of the uk 20 years ago, with more guns and nationalism :isleofman:

If some form of civil disorder occurred (not anarchy - that is something else entirely) then I would be very glad of the shortage of guns around in the UK.

I feel a lot safer with all the guns around. I'm not a world champion kung fu master wrestler.....But with a gun I could beat one! They are the great equalizer
a 70 year old man could send a thug in his prime running, with a cheap 38 snubby

I have a better idea.

After I have taken a ship (probably one of the Mersey ferrys) I can become a modern day Viking.:knight:

All will fear the Mersey Ferry of Doom!

http://www.visitliverpool.jp/maritim...pool-ferry.jpg

If there was a major disaster, why would I want the problem exacerbated by people shooting guns? Better that whatever relief operation or local organisation could work uninhibited. Your hyperthetical is adolescent nonsense I'm afraid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceasar010

... What would a liberal do if the shtf? Or a conservative who is not paranoid like them? Or what about a person in a country with no guns. ... .

---

Probably die of shock and disbelief at the onset; or by getting shot while standing on a pedestal and whining about the "unfairness" of it all; or of starvation, or exposure, after the enemy or conservative survivalists relieve them of their useful resources--assuming they don't mouth off and get dusted in the process.

Obviously being sarcastic. I would substitute the word "prepared" for paranoid in the quote, above. Hmm, reminders of zanshin keep popping up in my life lately ... maybe something wicked this way comes ... muahahaha.

It's good that you brought this to mind. Back where I was living a couple of months ago, the father of my Godchildren (a 16-year US Special Forces vet), some other friends with military backgrounds, and I did indeed develop a strategy (not a plan; plans are a bit dodgy at best in such situations), and stock up some provisions and tools. We identified several destinations with waypoints along the way, that offered a variety of benefits depending on the problem at hand, how to get there, how to survive there, what tools and resources we needed, etc.

Now, having moved across the country, that strategy no longer applies to me. While my buddy here is a great lawyer, he's not really the outdoorsy type, and we have a bundle of very young children. Furthermore, we live in a much more densely populated area; competition for resources and safe spots would be much heavier here. On the other hand, he is Vietnamese, and survived fleeing Vietnam with AK-47 rounds blowing chunks out of their little boats as they fled. Having spent two years or so in Malaysia in poverty before making it over here, perhaps I am not giving him, and his Vietnamese wife, due credit. Lol, I don't think we'll be discussing such things anytime soon though. We have a big bag full of 'right now' challenges with which to deal.

I can only imagine a few countries where a resourceful, determined person couldn't get guns in a pinch if he put his mind to it.

I will Muster a boarding party to attack your ferry! We willl steal the submarine on display in cleveland!

If you're talking about the common sensical anarchy, it all depends on if the others try to attack my loved ones or me. In any other case I care little for pointless struggles without an objective. If the objective is just then I'll join and support them.
If it's anarchy properly said, then I'm the factor, one of the sources of life from where freedom and equity borns. And the barrier of state power too.~D

Only way i see that an anarchy would break out in my city,would be civil War and in that case i would be on one of the sides fighting.:croc:

Bring it on!:duel:

The MF Doombringer can take down your smell old sub.

Toga I do have a place I can go and plenty of guns. Thats all my plan is though. I dont want a rifle or shot gun because I would not want people to know I am armed. You raise alot of very good points. I might look into a real plan now :bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceasar010

Me I really Don't know. Probably grab my service six(its a revolver), A couple hundred rounds of 38 special, some food and water and get the heck outa' dodge.

---

LOL, imagine two hundred and eighty million Americans grabbing their guns, some food and water, and getting the hell out of [insert local hellhole]. That would meet my definition of anarchy to a tee.

The morons on such forums are usually the biggest threat to their fellow citizens in unstable or hasardous situations. They are prepared for all sorts of black-and-white situations like spontaneous shoot-outs and such; not for the sort of gradual and unexpected political disintegration that usually creates havoc in nations and in the long run causes anarchy if people don't (re)organise.

The wise man looks for ways to control anarchy, not increase it. Guns may come into play occasionally, but I think building networks is much more important. The real antidote against anarchy is building alternative forms of social organisation in which civilised life is preserved or restored. The Hobbesian aproach is a dead end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceasar010

I thought there were no guns on the isle of man so how could you fight, with cricket bats and knives? This is why I wanted to know about the people in anti gun countries. How would they defend themselves from groups of people.

---

In a country without Guns allowed there won't be anarchy. The police would beat down the rioting germans without any problem.As for the extreme, I would either:

Be one of the people who started the riot ~;)

Or:

Beat down the friggin' rioters with a stick!

And yes, I do realize that anyone can get a weapon if he wants to, but there's not enough Weapon fanatics to supply a riot here, heh. ~D
I am so sure that I won't need any riot plans for the next 50 years in germany, except if something really world changing happens, and I mean it. Like atomic bombs dropped over Berlin or some such, in that case we germans would be most likely dead anyway.

I would pack up my family, arm myself and head them to Canada for safety (assuming Canada is not also in anarchy).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdrianII

LOL, imagine two hundred and eighty million Americans grabbing their guns, some food and water, and getting the hell out of [insert local hellhole]. That would meet my definition of anarchy to a tee.

The morons on such forums are usually the biggest threat to their fellow citizens in unstable or hasardous situations. They are prepared for all sorts of black-and-white situations like spontaneous shoot-outs and such; not for the sort of gradual and unexpected political disintegration that usually creates havoc in nations and in the long run causes anarchy if people don't (re)organise.

---

Only 80 million of us have guns. Which imo is too low.


And I would not mind having a friend in a militia with lots of supplies in such a situation! Would you?

Hmmm....maybe you should give us more details about whats happening?

Quote:

---

I would pack up my family, arm myself and head them to Canada for safety (assuming Canada is not also in ).

---

sounds reasonable, though i doubt that canada would be with out problems if they U.S was falling apart.

Theres only one sensible course of action to take when law and order collapses,

Thats to get yourself one of these and join a gang of leather wearing anarcho-freak-serial killing-heavily peirced-sodomy bikers.

https://img6.imageshack.us/img6/9302...hwheels3sh.jpg

anarchy-Texas~:joker: but if it did you will see me with the lone star killing about 80 welfare commie bastards:knight:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceasar010

And I would not mind having a friend in a militia with lots of supplies in such a situation! Would you?

---

That depends. If it meant that the militia would somehow control me, I would decline.

People who want to speak on this subject with some authority should at least study the most recent example of a modern nation falling apart in spectacular fashion: the former Yugoslavia. A major part of the problem there was the tendency of militias to assume powers that properly belonged to the (largely defunct) central or local governments. The result was an outbreak of militarism and outright fascism in many parts of former Yugoslavia. Yugoslavs are just as familiar with guns as Americans and many adult Yugoslavs at the time owned a rifle or pistol and had some form of military training and lots of hunting experience. They were all prepared to 'protect' their families, towns and economic resources. Some took to the hills in the fashion suggested by one or two patrons above. Look what it brought them: misery, mass murder, economic deprivation and outside intervention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdrianII

That depends. If it meant that the militia would somehow control me, I would decline.

People who want to speak on this subject with some authority should at least study the most recent example of a modern nation falling apart in spectacular fashion: the former Yugoslavia. A major part of the problem there was the tendency of militias to assume powers that properly belonged to the (largely defunct) central or local governments. The result was an outbreak of militarism and outright fascism in many parts of former Yugoslavia. Yugoslavs are just as familiar with guns as Americans and many adult Yugoslavs at the time owned a rifle or pistol and had some form of military training and lots of hunting experience. They were all prepared to 'protect' their families, towns and economic resources. Some took to the hills in the fashion suggested by one or two patrons above. Look what it brought them: misery, mass murder, economic deprivation and outside intervention.

---

Another example of why the second amendment to the USA constitution is primitive.

I thought there were no guns on the isle of man so how could you fight, with cricket bats and knives?
Ok I thought the Isle of man was like a minature UK.
A common misconception peddled by the "pro-gun no matter what" lobby .
Guns are not banned , certain types of firearm are banned in certain areas , gun ownership is regulated . It is called Gun control .
It is the same as the US in many ways .

Edit to add Some took to the hills in the fashion suggested by one or two patrons above. Look what it brought them: misery, mass murder, economic deprivation and outside intervention.

A prime example would be one of the "war-criminals" I work with , five years of fighting to "protect his home and family" from the anarchy that ensued with the collapse of the nation and now he cannot even go back home .

In a yugoslav-type situation (which I assume is what is being referred to, I would do my best to commandeer the following:

-plenty of supplies, especially good clothing (I already have this) and food and water
-a 30-odd-6, a simple sawn-off 12-gague (think Death Hunt- style weapons here; simplistic but effective, none of that fancy crap) and a .38 revolver, all with plenty off ammunition
-enough gas to carry me over to the nearest group of armed refugees

I would then attempt to band up with others like me, escape the wild militas who are carving up the US, and either carve out our own niche, or high-tail it any way we can to the nearest locale of government (ideally Canada).
:rifle: :help:

You could always join me on the MF Doombringer.

You guys would leave your country? I suspect if anarchy breaks out there will still be some of DC left. Then agian if that wasnt feeasable I would save Texas [IMG]https://img433.imageshack.us/img433/...exas0ns.th.jpg[/IMG]

Quote:

---

You guys would leave your country?

---

No, but I would start raiding bits of it from the afore mentioned MF Doombringer. And then make Merseyside my kingdom.

time to get up in a castle ruin and fire a M4 Carbine like NUTS till they :surrender: if they had cruel saargents then till they ~:mecry: may be fire a cannon and i'll try not to :helloo: my self

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abokasee

time to get up in a castle ruin and fire a M4 Carbine like NUTS till they :surrender: if they had cruel saargents then till they ~:mecry: may be fire a cannon and i'll try not to :helloo: my self

---

awesome~:cool:

Idaho beat me too it, so I'll throw in Berkman for fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A. Berkman

Anarchy: It is NOT bombs, disorder or chaos. It is NOT robbery and murder. It is NOT a war of each against all. It is NOT a return to barbarism or to the wild state of man. Anarchism is the very opposite of all that.

---

Quote:

---

In a country without Guns allowed there won't be anarchy. The police would beat down the rioting germans without any problem.As for the extreme, I would either:

---

Guns aren't needed to beat cops backs, see: WTO '99, Miami '01, Ottawa '00, Toldeo anti-Nazi protests, Melilla Immigration riots, Todds Road, Trinidad...it goes on like this for a while.

But I'm with Soulforged on this, I'd be the one starting it, and ending it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdrianII

... Some took to the hills in the fashion suggested by one or two patrons above. Look what it brought them: misery, mass murder, economic deprivation and outside intervention.

---

Yes, of course--the choice of those who 'took to the hills,' to protect their loved ones and survive as best they could brought on misery, mass murder, economic deprivation, and outside intervention. Plain as day, how could I have missed that?

The only place I mentioned guns in my previous post was in my description of how my buddy fled Vietnam. Yes, they would have been a part of the toolset. America and Yugoslavia are completely different physical, social, and economic environments. This example likens a pea to a cantaloupe. The thread scenario presented was vague, hence my post was general.

Ho hum ... yet another instance where a patron forwards his position by directly discrediting the opinions expressed by other patrons, when it is entirely possible to offer an opinion without criticizing someone else's views. But that's cool ... I'll just do what I usually do: :rolleyes:

Now we can all enjoy a florid response, which I'm sure will showcase an encyclopedic knowledge of the Yugoslavia situation and how it is relevant to the discussion at hand [puts a skin flick in the DVD player ...].

I'd form an armed criminal gang with some people I know. Then i'd probably start raiding, looting and brutally eliminating other gangs, all the while recruiting willing gun-toting citizens to resist whatever the hell is going on.

Arm my friends with whatever I can loot from the local gun store, then we'll cut our way to a safehouse and hold out there until rescue comes.

Start a "People's Free Militia" and head to the hills, but first stop by the local Gander Mountain.

Arm myself. Get plenty of food, bolt up the house. Beat back those that come?

Flee to Scotland?

If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdrianII

... The wise man looks for ways to control anarchy, not increase it. Guns may come into play occasionally, but I think building networks is much more important. The real antidote against anarchy is building alternative forms of social organisation in which civilised life is preserved or restored. ...

---

I agree with this. In my post, I assumed based on what was presented, that a critical point had been reached and it was no longer "safe and sane" to continue living "normally." I would think that there'd come a time, if "anarchy" reached "critical mass" in one's area, that removing one's self would be a prudent thing to do. My original post was speaking to this scenario.

Considering what happened in the USA after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, I think we should keep in mind that Americans do have a tendency to cooperate against a common enemy. If the source of the "anarchy" was external to the US, I would be willing to bet that, though many would "take to the hills," we would see a lot of cooperation--"network building"--than you would in other areas of the world ... . I don't think it would be as "anarchistic" as you presented in the post from which I extracted the above quote.

My favourite SHTF scenario is the zombie attack, which some of you may already know. I've discussed it at length with my friends, and we have coordinated our plans so that we could function better as a unit. This is all in the short-term, however: things like taking which vehicle, grabbing these weapon, munitions and supplies, rebasing here and raiding which stores for more supplies.

In the long-term, my friends and I disagree. Some would prefer to Mad-Max their way through the post-apocalypse, whereas I favoured more of a farming-commune approach with the ultimate goal in mind to rebuild some kind of community.

This is mostly all conjecture, but for the sake of the argument, we really did round up a few things like bats or knives, in order to properly construct a plan based around their use. Another friend of mine actually went to the trouble of measuring the corridor of the local Canadian Tire to make sure that he could drive his SUV through to the gun section.

All fun and games, of course, but I consider most serious things to be best handled in the same way.

I'd just drive to canada. It's only 20 min away from where I live.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceasar010

This is why I wanted to know about the people in anti gun countries. How would they defend themselves from groups of people.

---

How would one armed man defend himself against a group of armed men? He's no better off, except he's got a gun to kill himself with if the mob looks especially unfriendly. ~:rolleyes:

I would move to Japan. My wife wants to move back there anyway.

If I couldn't get on a flight across the Pacific, I would go hang out in Mexico, which is almost in walking distance. It would be good for my Spanish and the food is great.

Anarchy ?? I would have left a long time ago. Can't see any reason what so ever to stay in a country where they can't keep their act together. Call me when it's stabile and will return....... ~;)

Well first I would have wondered whet the hell happened as I cannot really see how this city could decend into anarchy within a few month, let alone days. But basically I would try to restore order by starting or joining a group with that intent.
But if it was because of a disease or if the looters would take much power (very unlikely here), I would stash up supplies and escape into the wilderness that is close by or trying to reach one of the islands outside the coast. Isolation sounds like a good idea in that scenario. Although it's high odds that I wouldn't survive the winter.

Would probably try to get hold of guns for hunting thuogh (mostly in the second scenario, in the first hunters with guns would probably exist within the group).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spetulhu

How would one armed man defend himself against a group of armed men? He's no better off, except he's got a gun to kill himself with if the mob looks especially unfriendly. ~:rolleyes:

---

Most people don't have guns in the USA.~;) If that changed there would never be trouble though.

Quote:

---

I thought there were no guns on the isle of man so how could you fight, with cricket bats and knives?
Ok I thought the Isle of man was like a minature UK.
A common misconception peddled by the "pro-gun no matter what" lobby .
Guns are not banned , certain types of firearm are banned in certain areas , gun ownership is regulated . It is called Gun control .
It is the same as the US in many ways .

---

Well put tribesman! Guns over here are a touchy subject, as alot of people own them, but alot of people want guns banned, so the members of the Manx parliment tend to stay away from the subject for the sake of not splitting the Parliment in two

It's a big issue in the states. Anti gun politicians rarely make it though. There are lots of lobbying groups on both sides. The million mom march is an anti gun one.....that doesn't even have a million members! While the nra has over 20 million~D

the problem with american anti-gun protestors, isn't there a thing in your constitution that says "all men are able to bear arms" or something like that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian_of_smeg16

the problem with american anti-gun protestors, isn't there a thing in your constitution that says "all men are able to bear arms" or something like that?

---

yes but no one seems to listen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strike for the south

yes but no one seems to listen

---

Aint that always the way~:cheers:

bladibla bla bla...i'm chatman superfast with msn tututudu

well if its local anarchy (Sweden/scandinavia) ill hope Germany or GB might move in and restore order in a civlized manner and then return power to the people once the idiots who starte the whole thing are in labor-camps working their as of rebuilding what they destroyed.

If its global-anarchy, i just hope the gun-nuts americans stay on their side of the pond. :hide:

But we could protect you.....and take your stuff~:joker:

I think that countries with the coscription like scandinavian countries.The possibility of Anarchy is lower becouse big percent of the adult male population and also many women have basic military training.Which offers better chance of co-operation between inviduals rather then running for the hills.~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ian_of_smeg16

the problem with american anti-gun protestors, isn't there a thing in your constitution that says "all men are able to bear arms" or something like that?

---

Well the problem is

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by second ammendment

A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

---

What does it really say?
Good English would have been such an improvement on the issue. ~D

This thread is going into it more clearly. What do YOU think the 2nd amendment means?
No need to turn this into a fullblown gun-tread.

In Australia when the traffic lights go out across the city traffic flows faster and has less accidents.

If the SHTF you can just expect a few more BBQs, sick days and more people at the beach. Australians have a virus called CF0, so Anarchy really would not be a worry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceasar010

It's a big issue in the states. Anti gun politicians rarely make it though. There are lots of lobbying groups on both sides. The million mom march is an anti gun one.....that doesn't even have a million members! While the nra has over 20 million~D

---

When I get old enough 20,000,001

Since everyone else is grabbing their guns, food, and water and making a break for it I will stick around and have the whole place to myself. ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Idaho

If some form of civil disorder occurred (not anarchy - that is something else entirely) then I would be very glad of the shortage of guns around in the UK.
...
If there was a major disaster, why would I want the problem exacerbated by people shooting guns? Better that whatever relief operation or local organisation could work uninhibited. Your hyperthetical is adolescent nonsense I'm afraid.

---

Tell that to the Korean shop owners in L.A. Or was that event just 'hypothetical adolescent nonsense'?

Quote:

---

How would one armed man defend himself against a group of armed men? He's no better off, except he's got a gun to kill himself with if the mob looks especially unfriendly.

---

He'd have the advantage of defense, and would probably only need to fire a few shots to convince the bad guys that there are easier targets elsewhere.

Crazed Rabbit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by QwertyMIDX

Since everyone else is grabbing their guns, food, and water and making a break for it I will stick around and have the whole place to myself. ~;)

---

That's the spirit!

Get it over my dead corpse. I own this place. ~D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Tell that to the Korean shop owners in L.A. Or was that event just 'hypothetical adolescent nonsense'?

---

Tell them what? That the poor guy beaten up by police brutality needs a gun to shoot the police beforehand, just to prevent the riot?

And it COULD get worse with more guns; the Korean shopowners would be dead, not just looted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

He'd have the advantage of defense, and would probably only need to fire a few shots to convince the bad guys that there are easier targets elsewhere.

---

Aye. An easier target elsewhere. Isn't that nice?

:hide:

Rather they go at an easier target then me~;) I bet every one here thinks the same.

What happens when the ammo runs out?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martinus

What happens when the ammo runs out?

---

We make some out of frozen meats!

Quote:

---

We make some out of frozen meats!

---

A) That does not work, I saw it on Mythbusters.
B) How would you freeze it. The electricity would probably be gone and trying to make meat bullets up a cold montain would make you look rather foolish and you would probably freeze to death.
C) Where would you get the gunpower and meat?

I can picture somebody trying to fire a salarami out of a gun.

I'm not running out any time soon~:joker: (Keep in mind I am not rich most of this was given to me)

I have 2000 rounds of 9mm luger(about half was given to me)

15000 rounds of 40gr 22lr (given to me)

500 rounds of 7.62/39(given to me)

300 rounds of 38 special

Unkown amount of shot gun shells.

80 rounds of 30-30

20 50 calibers with powder/primers (for a muzzle loader)

20 rounds of 243 (soft points)

Soon to add some 8mm mauser!



Together that equals about 20428+ rounds of ammunition.


Plus I plan to buy a reloader so I can use most of it again~D

That should be enough to last a while~;p

Quote:

---

Together that equals about 20428+ rounds of ammunition.

---

You could make a small house out of that much ammo.

No 22s are pretty small, They don't take up that much room.

You make a dog house and called the dog trigger.

I don't get why people are alarmed by guns at all. Where I have been it is not uncommon at all to see a man walking down the road to the black powder club with a flint lock, Or a kid with 22lr going into a field to shoot some cans, Or a Group of people with shot guns coming out of the woods after a day of hunting.


If this happened in europe or some parts of the USA. People would be diving for cover and calling the police....why? These people are not threatening at all! I want some one to explain to me why they get alarmed around guns.


I have argued with a few antis and they never say why guns are scary/evil/the curse of man kind etc.


Ps I know this is OT but guns are in the subject and I was curious about this.

The main fear is that somebody could do something bad with them and it cannot be undone.

For example two people are arguing and it comes to blows. If one of them has a gun and they, in a fit of anger, kill the other person, somebody has died by mistake, needlessly. That is the frightening thing, that that action cannot be undone and it is so easy to do.

Quote:

---

I have argued with a few antis and they never say why guns are scary/evil/the curse of man kind etc.

---

I would not say they are evil or the curse of man. They are useful, when used probably and by responsible people.

-Gather together the locals.
-Arm said locals, after attacking gun shop.
-Take aforementioned locals to port city.
-Raid food supplies in said port city.
-Take over a light cruiser and load with ammunition and food supplies.
-Sail away and invade the Principality of Sealand.
-Annex Sealand.
-Hold out until anarchy ends.