Attack on gun rights begin anew~

Ice Dancer said:
If he only recently, as an adult, began showing signs of mental illness, how could anyone have helped him? It has been speculated that he may have schizophrenia- That often does not present until his current age.

I
Click to expand...

Not always, they can be younger, my friends daughter, age eight.
 
Rana said:
there would be those who would defect, also, because they would not be able to fire on their own, I would guess.
Click to expand...
That is the concept behind the Oath Keepers - a promise to keep to the oath of a member of the U.S. military to defend the Constitution first, and to protect and follow the orders of those in charge of government only if it does not involve violating their oath to the Constitution.
 
Good Luck said:
The founders were dead set against a standing army. The idea was for the states to run organized militias of their own and nothing more.

However, our entire history is, essentially, one conflict after another - to include conflicts with Native American tribes in the expansion west. As such, it was rapidly recognized to be impractical to be continually reforming a federal army each time one was needed for a specific purpose. The first standing army was the Legion of the United States, which was formed in 1791. For a long time, though, federal troops were inferior in number - but superior in arms - to (most) state militias. That is why, in the Civil War, army units were more often than not referred to their state origins, such as 2nd Maine of Gettysburg fame, or 5th Virginia, 1st Mass, etc. Even in WWI, a significant minority of army units were formed directly from the state militias.

It was not until WWI, and the years following up to modern times that the federal army became consistently and permanently a single force superior to any state militia, indeed superior to many (if not all) state militias in combination. There was a brief period of time under Reagan that an attempt was made to significantly increase ready reserves - especially the state militias - in relation to federal forces. But that was more a cost saving measure while building up our military in a final Cold War push than having anything to do with a recognition of the dangers of an overwhelming standing federal military.
Click to expand...

thanks, much appreciated.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
it's a numbers game. As it stands, there are about 4 million service members total. about a million law enforcement officers. Unless the feds recalled every military member to combat a revolution here, we can expect to face maybe 3 million armed military members. There's no hope in a front line to front line fight, so it would certainly result in guerrilla warfare. It would then be just a matter of crushing the morale of the standing army. sniper fire and night time raid and run skirmishes is what would be needed.
Click to expand...
Don't forget IEDs and EFPs
 
Rana said:
Not always, they can be younger, my friends daughter, age eight.
Click to expand...

No one said it does not present in younger children...I said it most commonly presents in young adults.

Schizophrenia is a disease that typically begins in early adulthood; between the ages of 15 and 25. Men tend to get develop schizophrenia slightly earlier than women; whereas most males become ill between 16 and 25 years old, most females develop symptoms several years later, and the incidence in women is noticably higher in women after age 30. The average age of onset is 18 in men and 25 in women. Schizophrenia onset is quite rare for people under 10 years of age, or over 40 years of age.
 
Ice Dancer said:
If he only recently, as an adult, began showing signs of mental illness, how could anyone have helped him? It has been speculated that he may have schizophrenia- That often does not present until his current age.

I
Click to expand...

he first started showing symptoms of mental instability in middle school and they continued to grow
 
Good Luck said:
Yea, completely demilitarized. Fun to drive around in, maybe, but useless as a weapon. (Not to mention useless going up against a modern M1 Abrams, even if it had its gun tube operational.)
Click to expand...
Not completely useless as weapons. Tanks are great moral breakers. Even without a main gun (which can be restored), they can serve as psychological weapons or distractions. Going tank for tank with an M1 is out, but there is more than one way to skin a cat.
 
Old Fezzywig said:
Not completely useless as weapons. Tanks are great moral breakers. Even without a main gun (which can be restored), they can serve as psychological weapons or distractions. Going tank for tank with an M1 is out, but there is more than one way to skin a cat.
Click to expand...

did you see the tv footage of a guy who took an old sherman tank for a drive around (and over several objects including cars) san diego

he managed to strand himself on a center divider and was neutralized (killed)
 
Schadenfreude said:
did you see the tv footage of a guy who took an old sherman tank for a drive around (and over several objects including cars) san diego

he managed to strand himself on a center divider and was neutralized (killed)
Click to expand...
Yes, I've seen. I'm speaking in a tactical sense. Tanks are very powerful, with or without a main gun. I have a multitude of scenarios worked out how it could be advantageous to American revolutionaries.
 
Old Fezzywig said:
Yes, I've seen. I'm speaking in a tactical sense. Tanks are very powerful, with or without a main gun. I have a multitude of scenarios worked out how it could be advantageous to American revolutionaries.
Click to expand...

ever hear of a LAW used my american military units (not just heavy weapons platoons, most squads have at least one :))

then there is the TOW that is used by heavy weapons platoons

both the LAW and the TOW may be used against armored vehicles, the TOW is used against heavier armored vehicles like an abrams - the TOW has a much longer range than the LAW
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top