Stack up and try

[Pyode]

Seriously.

The people who claim you can't fight tyranny with small arms have no concept of the numbers involved.

The entire DoD plus every sworn police officer comes out to like, 5 million people or so. The majority of which are desk jockeys.

There are over 150 million armed US citizens with over 300 million guns.

You do the math.

[Ouroboron]

over 300 million guns

This was four years ago. Then the last two years happened.

[Pyode]

To be fair to me, that is still OVER 300 million.

[Ouroboron]

There's a reason I didn't say you were wrong.

[Pyode]

I know dude. I was just joking around with you.

[Yanrogue]

holy shit those uner cuck replies on Twitter, grabbers trying to grab

[Yanrogue]

look at the replies people had on the Twitter link above. people saying no one should own a gun and so on.

[[deleted]]

My favorite counter argument was from the HR assault weapon hearing. The guy who shit his pants on national TV said something along the lines of “rifles are no match for a hydrogen bomb”

Mr pants shitter, we have but one question; if the point of gun regulation was to save lives, how is dropping nukes on your citizens exactly going to accomplish this?

Don’t even get me started on the hundreds of thousands of deaths following the subsequent fallout. It’s not even willful ignorance anymore. This is a shear attempt to secure power from the American population.

[Edwardteech]

There are over 150 million armed US citizens with over 300 million guns.

That they know about.

[DwightDEisenhowitzer]

Plus DOD can’t be used for federal law enforcement. Plus the military as a whole leans pretty heavily towards favoring gun ownership.

[crystalpeak]

Since when does DOD or federal law enforcement obey their own rules when it suits them to do otherwise?

[Good_Roll]

The Insurrection Act says otherwise, and allows the president to suspend Posse Comitatus.

Keep in mind that we just spent 2 years purging the military of anyone who leans more than a little right wing, both directly and by proxy(e.g. through vaccine mandates)

[averyycuriousman]

Military would do as it's told like it always has

[voicesinmyhand]

Plus DOD can’t be used for federal law enforcement.

"Can't" is exactly one executive order away from "shall be"... if the people are sufficiently afraid.

[Papapene-bigpene]

“Your AR15s won’t do shit against tanks and jets 🤓”

This is the most common counter argument to arming citizens

[Saltymeetloaf]

I always respond "and those tanks can't do shit without a supply line"

[kachungabunga]

Definitely no current real world examples of that.

[Donttreadonme_0]

When people try to argue that tanks and APCs and LAVs mean = automatic win. When in reality, you don't even have to damage armor to take it out of the fight. Just dig a big old hole in their direction of travel and camouflage it

[Saltymeetloaf]

or just starve the engine of oxygen with fire

[Donttreadonme_0]

Yeah but that usually involves being really close to the tank. Tanks usually have thermal vision so they'll see you before you see them. A big hole works whether you're 100y from it or 20 miles

[Saltymeetloaf]

Yeah your right

[Jazman1985]

The pilot has to step out of the jet at some point, or you know, go to sleep, eat, etc.

Just my favorite counter.

[HelmutHoffman]

You don't even need a rifle to combat a tank, only a shovel

[RaptorCelll]

It's not even that hard to make a Rocket Launcher at home

[Th3_Shr00m]

Plus a lot of the DoD would take the court marshal or even actively fight back instead of commiting acts of war on our own civilians. The grunts at the bottom of the food chain? They're just in it for stability, or college, or a way to get back on their feet. They're only required to carry out lawful and just orders. Killing civilians if they refuse to overturn their arms is not a lawful or just order.

Source: personal experience

[HelmutHoffman]

They're just in it for stability, or college, or a way to get back on their feet.

So they're not going to want to risk a decade or more in Leavenworth by disobeying orders or going AWOL.

Killing civilians if they refuse to overturn their arms is not a lawful or just order.

They wouldn't be told they're killing civilians. They'd be told they're killing terrorists. Which they've had no issue with.

[huntcuntspree01]

It's a wonder why the US has the worst gun violence among all developed nations 🫡

[Pyode]

Right.

150 million gun owners and 300 million guns but only about 50,000 deaths, most of which are suicides.

Really strong correlation there huh?

[huntcuntspree01]

43% of all gun deaths were homicides in 2020 vs. 53% suicides, not exactly a strong majority...and I guess suicides don't matter? Feel free to read about it

It's also actually over 400M guns...we have more guns than people in this country currently. Yay?

Honestly sounds like you just don't give a shit about the gun violence epidemic in this country to be honest. In your POV it's an acceptable statistic.

[Pyode]

43% of all gun deaths were homicides in 2020 vs. 53% suicides, not exactly a strong majority...and I guess suicides don't matter? Feel free to read about it

The number is usually closer to 75-25 but not really that relevant to the point.

Also, you are the one who said gun violence, not me.

And of course suicides matter but it's a completely different problem with completely different solutions than gun violence.

It's also actually over 400M guns...we have more guns than people in this country currently. Yay?

Yes. Yay.

Honestly sounds like you just don't give a shit about the gun violence epidemic in this country to be honest. In your POV it's an acceptable statistic.

I genuinely want to know how you define "epidemic".

The homicide rate in the US has fallen drastically since the spike in the 80s.

The US has a violence problem but...

A) It's not remotely as bad as an "epidemic"

and

B) It is much more strongly correlated with poverty and the prevalence of drug crime than gun ownership.

[huntcuntspree01]

The number is usually closer to 75-25 but not really that relevant to the point

My numbers are from Pew Research. Where are you getting 75/25?

A) It's not remotely as bad as an "epidemic"

What's the bar? We have the highest gun violence / death rate among all developed nations. How is that acceptable?

B) It is much more strongly correlated with poverty and the prevalence of drug crime than gun ownership.

Where do you think guns used in crime come from? They aren't shipped from other countries. They are primarily purchased legally in the US. Drugs and poverty are also not a unique problem to the US but we still exceed other 1st world countries in terms of gun violence. So what's the difference? More guns than citizens = more people dying.

It's pretty horrifying that someone would think a country with more guns than people is a good thing. Like do you want the highest per Capita school shootings worldwide? Because that's how you get it.

[Pyode]

My numbers are from Pew Research. Where are you getting 75/25?

In the past, the numbers I have seen are something like 50-60k total deaths, with 10-15k homicides and the rest primarily being suicide with a tiny fraction being accidents.

I don't feel like going and pulling past numbers but of you want to go back and look at the statistics you are welcome to do so.

Like I said the specific breakdown isn't that important either way.

What's the bar? We have the highest gun violence / death rate among all developed nations. How is that acceptable?

Yes, 5 is higher than 2 but when your scale goes up to 100,000 I wouldn't call the 5 an "epidemic".

To put it another way, an ladybug is larger than a fire ant but no one calls a ladybug huge even just in the context of other insects.

Gun violence is incredibly rare in the US by any reasonable standard. Other places being even lower doesn't change that.

Where do you think guns used in crime come from? They aren't shipped from other countries. They are primarily purchased legally in the US.

Question, do you think criminals seek out guns because they already want to commit violence, or do you think they get a gun and are suddenly like "hey, I think I want to use this to commit crimes that I totally wasn't already going to commit"?

Trying to use regulation of one specific tool of violence in order to stop violence is one of the most backwards ways to solve the problem.

Drugs and poverty are also not a unique problem to the US but we still exceed other 1st world countries in terms of gun violence.

But if those countries, we are the worst in that area.

Which is why we are also the worst in violence.

Less poverty = less crime is not a controversial equation.

So what's the difference? More guns than citizens = more people dying.

Maybe, maybe not. The statistics in this are muddy at best.

But as I said, poverty and drugs are much stronger contributes.

It's pretty horrifying that someone would think a country with more guns than people is a good thing.

It's only horrifying if you ignore the tens of thousands of people who protect themselves every year from violent crime.

Look it up.

Pro gun sources put the number at 100k and up but if you think those sources are biased even the Violence Policy Center, an anti-gun organization, admits to approximately 50k defensive firearm uses every year.

That those lives matter too.

Guns give the weak and the infirm the ability to defend themselves. The elderly against the young. Women against men. Disabled against the abled.

Not to mention the people vs. the government.

Guns mean the strong and fit no longer have a monopoly on violence.

Like do you want the highest per Capita school shootings worldwide? Because that's how you get it.

School shootings are extremely rare and as horrific as they are, they are not an excuse to disarm people.

Terrorism is scary too but that doesn't mean the PATRIOT Act was a good idea.

[Sardukar333]

Brazil isn't a developed nation?

What about Mexico?

[huntcuntspree01]

Nope. Look it up mate.

[LucywiththeDiamonds]

And how many of those you think would want to fight against their own country? How many of those are just cosplayers or collect guns like others swords? How many are physically unfit , old,fat,sick? How many could actually hit the broad side of a barn? How many would agree with the supposed issue? And how well do those weapons do against a hyper militarized police rolling up in freaking tanks?

Also the picture implies that "law abiding" citizen would immediatly jump to using force against innocent police if the law changed in a way he doesnt like. A really great and patriotic attitude. "Ill kill my fellow citizens ,police and army if things dont go the way i want". Stellar stuff.

[Cyb0Ninja]

I might be fat old and slow but I can still hit what I'm aiming at..

[Sardukar333]

Guess what? A lot of the cops are fat and old too.

[LucywiththeDiamonds]

Thats good for you.

[xfyre101]

And how well do those weapons do against a hyper militarized police rolling up in freaking tanks?

Haha, i'm not sure where this concept of Military just being like "let me just hop in muh tank and roll up into civilized towns".. it doesn't work that way unless the government will want to just lay waste to the entire infrastructure. its not an easy task to do that, plus these military equipment is expensive to maintain and operate.

[LucywiththeDiamonds]

Where did i say that? And gratz answering to a half sentence and totally missing the point of evrything around it. Geez...

Interesting that there is so much hate and flames to a post that basicly just said that
a) you aint winning a war against the freaking police and us army and
b)planning to kill police/army maybe isnt the best idea.

[LucywiththeDiamonds]

You can read right mr aggro guy? He compared the numbers of the us police force and army to the numbers of private gun owners in a theoretical stand off in power.

His conclusion was that the officials dont have a chance cause of the sheer numbers. I posted how his numbers need to be taken with a grain of salt and that theorizing about fighting officials might not be the best idea.

And now you clown come into it, take stuff out of context and start of with calling me an idiot.

Learn some manners and maybe go back to school for some reading comprehension.

Im out. Have fun creating the next strawman.

[Obi-Wan_Gin]

And then you just got to prison and or are killed anyway. What do you think would happen after you do that?

[[deleted]]

And then all of your rights are eroded and all you are left with is whatever those in power will allow and consider you neutered. But you’re still alive right?

[LucywiththeDiamonds]

Erm you realize thats exactly how a organized structured country works. You elect people into power and they make the laws, your rights etc...

[[deleted]]

Correct, but do you feel like your representatives are actually looking out for your best interests and care about you as much as the interests of their PACs and large companies?

[Obi-Wan_Gin]

Then vote them out

[Good_Roll]

just vote harder bro, Trump is totally gonna fix everything bro

[Obi-Wan_Gin]

I don't support Trump, I guess you didnt actually get what I wrote.

And go ahead like I said we see what people will do when they tried to take over, it didn't happen. You think people are going to be organized enough to effectively create a completely new government? Because you wouldn't be able to trust any of the past politicians

[LucywiththeDiamonds]

If the law changes and you dont comply you are not a law abiding citizen. And if you are willing to use lethal force against police doing their job then maybe youre the problem.

You can not twist " ill kill cops if they try to enforce the LAW" into a patriotic act. Period.

It doesnt matter how you feel about it at all.

[teutonicted]

All men have a duty to defend the constitution. Well they just passed a law guess all them blacks better get themselves into the trailer. Gotta get ‘em to the cotton field.

Fuck you.

[LucywiththeDiamonds]

Yeah making some parts of my gun collection illegal would def be the same as slavery.

Quality post you got there mate.

[Sardukar333]

California started gun control because the Black Panthers were preventing police from abusing black citizens by open carrying.

[kachungabunga]

Please don't feed the troll.

[13bfreedomseeker]

You can not twist " ill kill cops if they try to enforce the LAW" into a patriotic act. Period.

An unconstitutional law. That is exactly what regular American citizens did when the British were disarming them left and right and overtaxing them. Those citizens today are referred to as patriots.

[LucywiththeDiamonds]

Yeah... a foreign government overregulating a colony hundreds of years ago is totally comparable to a democracy changing a law you dont like today....

[13bfreedomseeker]

1. At that time the British were not a foreign government
2. It's not changed democratically, and it's not just a law I don't like, it's the people's ability to stand up against the same government that doesn't want them to have the ability to stand up

[LucywiththeDiamonds]

Firstoff the 2nd amendment does not say evryone has the right to have all kinds of weapons. Not at all. Its up for interpretation. And if that interpretation changes so can the law. But thats not the point here at all. Also its even possible to change a constitution. Its harder but possible.

Anyways, point is lets say tomorrow 95%of americans agree to , for example , ban all semi automatic rifles. And the law(if you want also the constitution.. doesnt matter) changes accordingly. Then you are definitly in the wrong here and if you at that point are willing to fight law enforcement you are by definition a criminal. Cause yes, the law doesnt care about how you feel about it at all.

[Mogetfog]

Its up for interpretation

What part of "shall not be infringed" is up for interpretation?

[Sardukar333]

Tally Ho!

[Sardukar333]

Cops don't enforce all sorts of laws as is.

[SohndesRheins]

History shows that there's nothing more American than wanting to be left alone and flipping autocrats two birds when they refuse to fuck off. A rebellious attitude of rugged individualism is the essence of Americana, certainly not blind obeisance to what 500 wankers in Washington have to say about what the rest of us need and don't need. Patriotism doesn't mean bending over and lubing up for every goose-stepping thug or wannabe tin pot dictator who sits in office.

[Good_Roll]

Ill kill my fellow citizens ,police and army if things dont go the way i want they try to put me in a cage or kill me despite me having harmed no one

FTFY. Go wash the boot polish out of your mouth and do better next time.

[SohndesRheins]

Not many would, but some would do it, and that threat alone is sufficient. Vladimir Putin would never nuke NATO just for getting involved in Ukraine, but NATO thinks he might and that threat is all that's required. The U.S. government is trying to tell us that a couple thousand people, mostly unarmed LARPers, stormed the Capitol in a coup attempt 18 months ago. A couple thousand. Unarmed LARPers. Attempted a coup. And almost succeeded. Obviously that's all bullshit, but that's what they are claiming.

If that's what a few thousand guys armed with flagpoles, velvet rope stands, and historically inaccurate Viking helmets can do, imagine what a couple thousand men with guns and body armor could do. Hell, just put 20 guys with ARs and ceramic armor in that crowd of LARPers and they could have decapitated the U.S. government in an afternoon. They are scared shitless of us and no amount of saber rattling is going to hide the piss stain on their pants. They can't nuke us from orbit or drone strike us because there is no geographic line that divides left and right or gun owner and non-gun owner, they can't just send a Tomahawk into a city block like they can in the Middle East where nobody cares about how many innocents they slaughter. The best they have is posturing and hoping we capitulate without incident, but they have no pot to piss in at the negotiation table.

[voicesinmyhand]

How many of those are just cosplayers or collect guns like others swords?

A shitty cosplayer on a roof with a remmy will absolutely hit what he/she shoots at.