Quote
vortexmagus
Yeah, actually, I have. Generally speaking, though, I don't think offering a shotgun blast to a police officer, no matter how corrupt, is a really good way to get your point across: have you ever tried it? Do so and let me know the results.
Everyone values their life. Even Sheriff Pete the meth addict. The very notion that everyone is armed in a rural area makes him less likely to attempt any nonsense of the sort. I haven't, but my grandfather answered the door with a shotgun in hand. He never shot anyone since it wasn't needed. Game wardens and la migra both have come knocking and been greeted by it. Guns don't have to be used directly to be a deterrant. That's the great thing about them.
I've also been shot at while rummaging a junkyard at night and avoided committing various criminal acts as a juvenile solely because where I grew up people tend to be armed.
Quote
vortexmagus
Ironically, its organized crime that has benefited the most from lax gun laws. Not only is there a massive, thriving black market for guns that they can abuse, but their enforcers can walk around armed, perfectly legally, and its harder for police to gainsay them. That being said, if you read my points carefully, I did say self-defense was an acceptable argument, so I don't even take issue with you here.
You're right. You did say self defense. The government is basically synonymous with organized crime. That's the point I was trying to make. Both will benefit even more from stricter gun control since they will be the only ones that have them.
Quote
Do you think the government is so powerful and all-knowing at this point that no one, no group of people can cause enough disruption to affect it?
Quote
vortexmagus
No, but I think a military with more money than the total GDP of most small countries is probably not going to be very afraid of any of those guns that Republicans are desperate to preserve. One of the core arguments behind preserving second amendment rights "Herpa derp must defend from government" is both outdated and foolish. Even now, most American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan don't die to firearms. More than 70% of our casualties are due to IEDs and explosives. If you *really* wanted to defend yourself from the government you should be defending your right to nitroglycerin and semtex, not glocks and berettas.
You're absolutely right on the last part and I'm very familiar with improvised explosive devices. I've disarmed (detonated) literally thousands of them (well, I was medic for the guys that did anyway) and know quite well how to make them. Working for the Navy's bomb squad was more fun that training with Savannah's SWAT team. EOD > SWAT, suck it SWAT.
That said, read the image I posted in the other part of the thread on military vs. government vs. civilian. It's really a good one.
Regardless where you fall on the issue, I promise men like me and Pro won't abandon you to the corrupt establishment.
Sportsmanship killed CF