Well to be fair to the folks at Waco they did not deploy their armaments. They clearly didn’t want a full on war with the Federal Government if they had a lot more federal agents would’ve died. They would’ve still been put down but a contained small group is a far cry from the kind of situation that would occur if Revolution broke out. The military would be very unlikely to remain united in such a situation. Soldiers would refuse to fire on civilians. It happened in Syria and anyone who doesn’t think it would happen to a greater degree here are naïve.
Truthfully in our modern era a coordinated armed resistance would have an advantage on the ground in a modern country. A country would be quickly paralyzed in an all out rebellion and that would benefit the revolutionaries. Every move the unpopular government would make would help grow the rebellion. Let them start firing on citizens and declaring marshal law and it would get worse for them. Sure one man and a gun can’t hold off the government but one man martyr is very powerful image. Waco and Ruby Ridge both fed greatly into the distrust of the federal government. I couldn’t imagine anyone reading about Ruby Ridge without being incensed to righteous anger towards the feds.
Having guns means you can resist if it comes to it. It doesn’t mean you wont die in your defense but it means you can exact a cost something that will give pause to would be tyrants.
Waco was (a) a cult, not anti-government.
He can’t understand that it’s logic,but it’s par for him.
On second thought. Maybe it would've been better if he had been around in 1773. That way he wouldn't be around today.
'Course, somebody else just like him would be around.
Kapo in making
Blissfully ignorant of history
Pray tell sans guns
How to resist tyranny
Waco...however flawed Koresh
Was push back of a sort
And it got attention from both sides
In the long view it served a purpose but at a high cost of children
It may or may not be etched down the road
If that was the case then why do I hear liberals calling for a “bloody revolution”?
Waco was the FEDGOV against a small church...what Bill Maher needs to think about is whether that same force could have won against every household in Texas.
I think the answer becomes obvious to even the most casual observer. There are less than 25,000 police officers in the entire state of Texas. Add another 30,000 Fed LEO’s if you like. There are over 25,000,0000 people in the great State of Texas (mostly armed to the teeth).
If it ever came down to it, they wouldn’t amount to a fart in the wind against those odds. Now if nobody was armed and they had to throw rocks instead, it would be an entirely different story. A seven year old can see that. I am pretty sure Bill Maher can too if he is honest about it.
The problem is, here, that he’s very very wrong.
There’s a threshold out there, a tipping point, where The People will rise up against tyranny. Waco wasn’t it (small group of loons) and neither was Boston (very specific, temporary and isolated incident involving a massive perception of potential threat to the public).
Gun confiscation could be it. The one thing that, in my experience, stops gun-control supporters in their tracks is to point out that if 1% of 1% of the 80 million gun owners in the US were to do the “Molon Labe” thing in the face of confiscation there’ll be 8,000 separate instances of armed response to tyranny.
Local, state and Federal law enforcement will be quickly overwhelmed by that kind of response ... requiring either a backing-down, or an escalation (call in the National Guard and the military). Which then may provoke ANOTHER 1% of 1% to start standing their ground (so another 8,000 incidents of armed response).
Leading up to Pearl Harbor Admiral Yamamoto - who was trying very hard to reign in the Japanese Army nutters who were taking their nation to war against the US made comments along the lines of it being insanity to try to invade the US (which he said was the ONLY way Japan could actually win) because there’d be a “rifle behind every blade of glass”. There was a Russian back in the 50s (not Molotov - that would be way too ironic) who said the same thing but used the example of Coke bottles and gas stations ...
Dipsh*ts (Admin/Mods, pls excuse that one) like Maher - who have lived privileged and affluent lives in very sheltered and protected environments, just think that if the Government pushes The People will cave in, and for those who don’t cave in the Government has the means to put them in their place.
That kind of clueless thinking scares the cr*p out me. Especially if he’s reflecting the thoughts/opinions of real decision-makers.
Think of it as analogous to the freedom of the press. Reading a newspaper to a column of tanks won't turn them back, but a vigorous journalistic culture just might turn our leaders minds away from going too far.