U.S Citizens right to own a firearm debate

[Spino]

Side with the traitors? Like hell! The marines would gun them down mercilessly. They're MARINES, not flower packing, flag burning, oath breakers. I'm sure the sentiment would be napalm would be too quick a death.

Overwhelm guns that can fire thousands of bullets a minute? You really think that the american public is going to engage in Human Wave tactics? As CountArach points out, most uprisings anywhere peter out after at most a few thousand are killed. Perhaps forces such as the North Korean Army might fight on climbing over their dead into the maw of death, hoping that the other side will run out of bullets but I can't think of anyone else.

The patriots did win, or to be more accurate the Brits stopped fighting. Other things on their side: a Government weeks travel away. A King who was insane. Backing from the second biggest power at the time. If at the time Britain had sought to keep the 13 colonies irrigardless of risk or loss elsewhere they most likely would have done - with the massive loss of power in what were deemed more important areas, and probably the deposition of the king to boot.

The problem with a US pro-gun revolution vs. the Marine Corps scenario is that most Marines, like most people in the US military, are pro-gun conservatives. Ordering US troops to fire on say, rioters, looters, domestic terrorists, etc. is one thing but asking them to fire on a cross section of the population fighting to uphold the 2nd Amendment? Good luck with that. Having the US government suddenly label the members of such a movement as traitorous enemies of the state is just asking for a mutiny and/or military coup.

[Ironside]

The problem with a US pro-gun revolution vs. The Marine Corps scenario is that most Marines, like most people in the US military, are pro-gun conservatives. Ordering US troops to fire on say, rioters, looters, domestic terrorists, etc. is one thing but asking them to fire on a cross section of the population fighting to uphold the 2nd Amendment? Good luck with that. Having the US government suddenly label the members of such a movement as traitorous enemies of the state is just asking for a mutiny and/or military coup.

And having enough influence on the military that goverment cannot use the military against it's own population is only about 1000 times more important than the amount of small arms among the population the day the revolution comes...

On the issue at hand I would say that a nation obsessed with the idea of no gun restrictions aren't a nation that should have it.


Edit: BTW how did the Iraqi military fare vs the might of the US military? Are the average US citizen more armed than that?

And don't come with the insurgancy. A: You're supposed to be liberating the country. B: You can withdraw and aren't stuck in a death match scenario. C: The US losses are a fart in the wind compared to the amount of troops there.
FYI the amount of troops vs population would be higher in the second US civil war than what it is in Iraq.

[Sheogorath]

Anybody find the poll results rather amusing?
Almost exactly in line with my prediction :P