The most insane anti-gun op-ed of all time

[JTScribe]

Greg Littell: The idea of ?armed rebellion? in the U.S. is ludicrous | TheUnion.com

"In the Revolutionary War, Americans were essentially armed similarly to the British; they both had muskets, swords, and cannons. Now, the arms disparity between a “tyrannical government” and citizens is so huge that the idea of “armed rebellion” is ludicrous.

Assuming the military was part of the tyranny (which it would have to be for tyranny to have any meaning), any rebelling national band of “patriots” would be told something like, “you either lay down your arms or the entire city of Dallas, Texas will disappear. You have one hour. If you continue, the next city to disappear will be Atlanta, Georgia.”

Yes, he's seriously talking about nuking American cities to end an armed insurrection.

 

[steveh_131]

Well, it sounds like he's talking about what the hypothetical 'tyrannical' government would do... not that he's advocating it.

That said, this article is stupid and the author is stupid. Come and take them.

 

[JTScribe]

It's just the typical "citizens with rifles can't beat tanks and airplanes, so you should have no problem with them being banned" nonsense.

 

[SEIndSAM]

That name sounds very familiar....I think he has posted something else idiotic in the past.

 

[steveh_131]

The logic is so silly. He's correct that the government has us outgunned, and that is thanks to anti-2A legislation that prohibits us from owning so many different weapons. The right solution would be to eliminate those prohibitions - but this yahoo's calling for more.

 

[steveh_131]

That name sounds very familiar....I think he has posted something else idiotic in the past.

Oh, but he's a 'target shooter', making him qualified to talk out of his rear about things he has no clue about.

 

[ZenMaster]

Armed rebellion, in this country, IS ludicrous.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Some people haven't observed history very well. Americans should be well aware how an out armed force can defeat the mightiest nation on earth.

 

[cbhausen]

Lay down your arms or Dallas will disappear in an hour? Bull****! We don't have the testicle fortitude to do this to our true enemies, let alone our own people. The oath-keepers in the military and law enforcement would turn their arms against tyrannical leaders, not follow their orders to eliminate us.

 

[Lowe0]

Some people haven't observed history very well. Americans should be well aware how an out armed force can defeat the mightiest nation on earth.

Really? We're not talking about plucky Minutemen evading the Redcoats. What's your plan for defeating a nuclear power willing to use scorched earth tactics?

 

[eldirector]

Really? We're not talking about plucky Minutemen evading the Redcoats. What's your plan for defeating a nuclear power willing to use scorched earth tactics?

Same as any other dramatically outgunned populace? Guerrilla Warfare from within the nuclear power's own cities/population. Renders their nukes ineffective.

Not "nuclear" (yet), but this scenario is playing out around the world right now.

 

[flatlander]

Nice rebutal:
?Put down your arms, resistance is futile!? - Rebane's Ruminations

Bob

 

[Spear Dane]

Really? We're not talking about plucky Minutemen evading the Redcoats. What's your plan for defeating a nuclear power willing to use scorched earth tactics?

Does the name Ho Chi Minh ring any bells? Mao? Asymmetric warfare? I don't even like thinking about this...but it could be done.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Really? We're not talking about plucky Minutemen evading the Redcoats. What's your plan for defeating a nuclear power willing to use scorched earth tactics?

Hold on, lemme make a phone call in Southern Pashto.

 

[jbombelli]

Really? We're not talking about plucky Minutemen evading the Redcoats. What's your plan for defeating a nuclear power willing to use scorched earth tactics?

Ask the Viet Cong.

 

[JTScribe]

Really? We're not talking about plucky Minutemen evading the Redcoats. What's your plan for defeating a nuclear power willing to use scorched earth tactics?

So the third time that a nuclear weapon is ever used in war is by a government against its own citizens . . . and you don't think that the world at large would condemn such an act in the strongest terms possible?

Good grief, not only that, but you threaten the metropolitan areas that generally would support the government? The red state ideology are generally dispersed through the countryside; you're going to threaten what would most likely be their ideological enemies in an insurrection? "Please Br'er Fox, don't throw me in that briar patch!"

 

[Lil Bob]

This is the new tactics being used by gun control groups that want to erase the 2nd amendment. They work at slowly adding more and more "common sense" restrictions while portraying themselves as supporting the 2A, when in fact they do not. In the end this guy's argument does not make sense and is very poorly crafted with BS that is not supporting. The sad part is that I bet there are a bunch of people that will blindly accept his argument because they do not know any better.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

The red state ideology are generally dispersed through the countryside; you're going to threaten what would most likely be their ideological enemies in an insurrection? "Please Br'er Fox, don't throw me in that briar patch!"

.gov nuking New York City, L.A. and Chicago or any large city is simply attriting its own replacement pool.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Really? We're not talking about plucky Minutemen evading the Redcoats. What's your plan for defeating a nuclear power willing to use scorched earth tactics?

Same as any other dramatically outgunned populace? Guerrilla Warfare from within the nuclear power's own cities/population. Renders their nukes ineffective.

Not "nuclear" (yet), but this scenario is playing out around the world right now.

Does the name Ho Chi Minh ring any bells? Mao? Asymmetric warfare? I don't even like thinking about this...but it could be done.

Hold on, lemme make a phone call in Southern Pashto.

Ask the Viet Cong.

So the third time that a nuclear weapon is ever used in war is by a government against its own citizens . . . and you don't think that the world at large would condemn such an act in the strongest terms possible?

Good grief, not only that, but you threaten the metropolitan areas that generally would support the government? The red state ideology are generally dispersed through the countryside; you're going to threaten what would most likely be their ideological enemies in an insurrection? "Please Br'er Fox, don't throw me in that briar patch!"

.gov nuking New York City, L.A. and Chicago or any large city is simply attriting its own replacement pool.

Pretty much all of this.

 

[Cerberus]

.gov nuking New York City, L.A. and Chicago or any large city is simply attriting its own replacement pool.

Would actually eliminate most of their replacement pool. Do most of the normal part of this country a big favor.