Sunday, February 10, 2013 12:51:53 AM
@keith2- While I agree that armed civilians wouldn't stand a chance against the military, an armed populace still works as a counterbalance against armed government power. Over the last 12 years, we`ve seen a significant erosion of our civil rights via the Patriot Act, the Homeland Security Act, the NDAA, the Obama Administration`s unilateral declaration that the President of the US has the right to order the assassination of American Citizens with no judicial or legislative oversight, etc. Were the US population ever fully disarmed (despite what many gun owners fear, I don`t envision that happening any time soon), I can guarantee that law enforcement agencies, from the FBI all the way down to city PDs, would suddenly become far bolder in their willingness to trample our rights- in the name of national security, of course. And no, I don`t own a gun myself.
Saturday, February 9, 2013 10:40:29 PM
@Keith2: Yeah, I've got to agree with you there. Not too long ago I read a piece by an Army Ranger who was discussing what chance these backyard wannabe warriors would have against the U.S. military. He made several great points, the first being that the moment a group of citizens take up arms and start attacking our government, they become "enemy combatants" and most trained U.S. military would not have a problem mobilizing against them. All of his other points were contrasts between those who train, day after day, 40 hours a week, as a team, to kill in combat versus overweight guys with paunches who spend the occasional weekend on a paintball course. Not much of a contest, really.