Posted on 12/23/2012 1:26:07 PM PST by upchuck
No, it won't.
Replace "government law officers" with "United Nations mercenaries" and you are onto something.
UN mercenaries from where? Usually, when the call goes out, thousands of shoeless Africans show up since their government gets paid by the head to ‘donate’ them to the cause. The US usually ends up outfitting them with everything.
Isn’t it nice to read an article like this? Straight shooting. No BS. No politically cowrecked crap. Just the facts.
It is good to know your enemy. There is much to learn from the Chinese Cultural revolution. Note that the police were not enforcers. They were isolated and restrained. The community organizer with devide at all levels. We have much in recent history to look at for example.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution
On August 22, 1966, Mao issued a notice to stop “all police intervention in Red Guard tactics and actions.” Those in the police force who defied this notice were labeled “counter-revolutionaries.” Mao, drawing on his experiences from prior to 1949, suggested that “the sign of a true revolutionary was his desire to kill.” Mao’s praise for rebellion was effectively an endorsement for the actions of the Red Guards, which grew increasingly violent.[32] Public security in China deteriorated rapidly as a result of central officials lifting restraints on violent behavior.[33] Xie Fuzhi, the national police chief, said it was “no big deal” if Red Guards were beating “bad people” to death.[34]
It is good to know your enemy. There is much to learn from the Chinese Cultural revolution. Note that the police were not enforcers. They were isolated and restrained. The community organizer with devide at all levels. We have much in recent history to look at for example.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution
On August 22, 1966, Mao issued a notice to stop “all police intervention in Red Guard tactics and actions.” Those in the police force who defied this notice were labeled “counter-revolutionaries.” Mao, drawing on his experiences from prior to 1949, suggested that “the sign of a true revolutionary was his desire to kill.” Mao’s praise for rebellion was effectively an endorsement for the actions of the Red Guards, which grew increasingly violent.[32] Public security in China deteriorated rapidly as a result of central officials lifting restraints on violent behavior.[33] Xie Fuzhi, the national police chief, said it was “no big deal” if Red Guards were beating “bad people” to death.[34]
I would think most Americans would have far less hesitation to pull the trigger against a foreigner than a U.S. jackboot.
A couple of salient points for the anti-gun folks out there.
Mexico with 112 million citizens and rigid gun control had in excess of 11,000 gun related homicides in 2010. Almost none were defensive.
The United States with 311 million citizens had just over 9,000. Many were defensive with armed citizens defending life or property.
How is that gun control thing working out for Mexico?
I am 100% in like mind with this post.
But I think if we plan on protecting ourselves we need to be realistic about what we can expect.
Unless the commies slip up and move too fast they are going to get a lot of their goal by incrementalism. It’s worked for 40 years and it is still working. It helps having a completely compliant press working for them.
As far as the military (and the police and national guard) is concerned, “they” are methodically destroying the service from within at a very fast rate. That “most” would side with the people is still possible, but will not be for a lot longer.
Gun owners had better think long and hard, and be prepared to do what our founding fathers were willing to do. Are you willing to die? Because (IMO) it is going to come to that at some point.
I’m not being negative, or defeatist. It will come to that and we will have to demonstrate the incredible stoicism and character of our forefathers if we expect to have a chance.
My uniformed colleagues and I used to have some interesting discussions on the normally boring mid-watches. We would come up with a certain scenario and spend the next 3 or 4 days discussing how to best respond. I’ll bet we weren’t alone and I’ll also wager that’s still going on.
Well, actually it is “Deo Vindice” and not “Deo Vindici,” but you likely know that, and you just hit the wrong key. But your translation is a tad inaccurate (though a nice thought), as “Deo Vindice” means, literally, “God will vindicate.”
I think a great number of US troops would sit this one out, or side with the patriots.
They're already here.
That advice is more appropriate for any would-be jackbooted thugs, than it is for patriotic, law-abiding American citizens, of which there are 90 million who are armed.
If the federales could somehow press all of the armed services personnel and every law enforcement officer in the country into confiscation duty, they wouldn't amount to more than about 5 million strong.
Even the most arrogant dictator would shrink from those odds.
Further incrementalism is their only choice, and they'd better be exceedingly careful as to what they say and do while they're at it. They're about two inches away from sparking something that they do not have the power to extinguish.
Perhaps some are. They’re going to need a lot more reinforcements (and body bags).
Unfortunately, Obama is a psychopath (I mean that in the true clinical sense of the term). His arrogance is not the problem per se, it is only one manifestation of his pathology. We can't assume that logic and a reasonable grasp of the situation will guide his actions in a practical direction.
IOW, we can't base any expectations of his behaviour on rational reasoning processes. This man's mental illness means we have a very loose cannon here. We should not assume that any action by him is without the realm of possibility.
The question I ask these gun control morons is this: who exactly do you think will come and get my guns? The local Sheriff I know by name? The officers whom I chat with from time to time? Our local Government agents, who in reaction to the Sandy Hook massacre have introduced legislation to increase access to guns? Maybe they'll send the Armed Forces my way. Of course they forget that while they were raising their kids to protest the military we were teaching ours to serve.
It is possible that the semi-auto ban be reinstated. I have my doubts as long as the Republicans hold the House, but possible. But even Biden is not stupid enough to think that there is any way to collect our guns.
Unfortunately, Obama is a psychopath (I mean that in the true clinical sense of the term). His arrogance is not the problem per se, it is only one manifestation of his pathology. We can't assume that logic and a reasonable grasp of the situation will guide his actions in a practical direction.
Yes, but even the most insane would-be dictator needs a massive, and utterly obedient force to wrest complete and total control of a nation. It also requires an unarmed and cowed populace to achieve complete success.
Obama has neither of those things. He doesn't command complete loyalty within the government or military, either.
Without at least two of those three conditions in his favor, he doesn't stand a chance. Any dictator worth his salt would tell him that.
how many people just surrendered when the police unilaterally declared confiscation? no law. no court order. they just took.
how many? It was just the law abiding that disarmed willingly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.