Like Tree279Likes

Thread: 18 Children Dead in CT Mass Shooting

  1. #476
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,247

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I believe my "expert" more than you.
    And I believe the fact that you yourself put "expert" in quotations shows the lack of his expertise.


    Didn't say the round was more powerful than a .30-06 or .308. I said from a reliable source the round could penetrate 1/4" steel at 700 yards.
    And I've proven, with that scary thing called FACTS, that its not possible. Ya know, those number things I posted a little bit ago? Those are called facts.

    So what is the criteria for a round to transition from an intermediate cartridge to being considered high powered? Given that innocent human targets are the concern, why is that nomenclature relevant?

    For starters, as has been stated before, nomenclature is important when you're trying to strip people of their rights.

    As far as the transition from intermediate to high powered, let me throw some of those magical things called facts at you again. (These definitions come from the firearm industry, so I know you'll dismiss them anyway because they don't fit your agenda)

    "An intermediate rifle cartridge is a round that is less powerful than a cartridge designed for a typical battle rifle (30.06, .308, 7.26x54 etc) but more powerful than the average pistol round (.45ACP, 9mm, .40S&W etc). Recoil of a rifle that fires an intermediate cartridge is significantly lower than that of a rifle firing a full size round, which makes it easier to control the recoil. Effective range for a intermediate cartridge is between 250 and 500 meters (270-550 yards)"

    So, considering the .223 meets, (hang on let me check, oh yeah that's right) ALL of those criteria, it is an intermediate cartridge. It is less powerful than a .308 round, more powerful than a .45ACP round, and the maximum effective range for a human target is about 450-525 yards. Pretty sure that meets the criteria for an intermediate cartridge. Not a "high powered rifle" as you and the lame stream media like to proclaim.

    Facts are fun, aren't they?
    Last edited by Chenzo; 01-14-2013 at 09:55 PM.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  2. #477
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,207

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    The consistency is the mindset that "nothing is perfect, so we should do nothing."
    And your consistency is the mindset of sticking your fingers in your ears like a 3 year old and yelling "NO NO NO!!" when you are met with irrefutable evidence that you are wrong. Claiming that the industry that manufactures firearms isn't a better source for identifying its own products than a general purpose dictionary or some anti-gun politician. Claiming you aren't anti-gun but are willing to give away the rights of gun owners in the blink of an eye. Claiming you don't want to ban any guns but then calling for ending civilian ownership of wrongly identified semi-automatic rifles as assault rifles, incuding some by Senator feinstein like my Ruger 10/22 .22lr rifle squirrel hunting rifle. Claiming that the purchase and use of assault potato chips is highly regulated by the government. Claiming that the bolt action '03 Sprongfield and the semi-automatic M1 Garand are assault rifles. Claiming there is correlation between explosives and firearms owership. Oh yeah and your crowning glory of consistency, when you realized your a z z was getting stomped by pro-gun people here you drift off int the Travon Martin incident and play the race card. You are consistent only in your ridiculous, mostly baseless attempts at debate, and your continued pretending to be pro-gun. When inreality you are a Neville Chamberlain willing to pretend your useless attempts at bans and punishing law abiding citizens are actually effective at stopping violent crime. You do know who Neville Chamberlain is don't you? The champion of appeasement...Look him up, he gave away what wasn't his in a false belief it would bring peace.

    Are you aware that the term "Assault weapon" is a made up term originated by the anti-gun crowd? Unlike the proper firearms nomenclature "Assault Rifle" that refers to a rifle firing an intermediate powered bullet and that is capable of BOTH fully automatic and semi-automatic fire.

    What you don't like is you can't shout me down with your nonsense and misinformation. That I can stand toe to toe with you and shut you down over and over with FACTS, something you are completely unfamiliar with in this topic is I am sure a new experience for you.
    DeputyMarshal and Chenzo like this.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  3. #478
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,207

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    Wasn't it in Ft Hood, Army Camp in Texas where this happened? A soldier turning on his own...

    Yes, a rare occurrence.
    An incident of either a disturbed individual, or a Islamic sympathizer, that attacked other soldiers on base. Hardly the same as expecting the might of the US military to turn on the citizens they took an oath to protect.
    Chenzo likes this.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  4. #479
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,207

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I believe my "expert" more than you.

    Of course you do. Can I have his name and e-mail address in a pm so I may contact him and ask him a couple of questions? Or is this another of your fanciful, unsupported, fairy tales?


    Didn't say the round was more powerful than a .30-06 or .308. I said from a reliable source the round could penetrate 1/4" steel at 700 yards.

    And I call nonsense. It is not a reliable man killer past 300 to 500 meters. if it won't kill a man at those ranges, reliably, I doubt it will penetrate 1/4 inch of steel at 700 yards.

    So what is the criteria for a round to transition from an intermediate cartridge to being considered high powered? Given that innocent human targets are the concern, why is that nomenclature relevant?

    The length of the cartridge and the resulting amount of powder, followed by ballistics, determine an intermediate cartridge over a high powered cartridge.

    Examples: The Standard US issue 5.56mm x 45mm is an intermediate cartridge. The Standard US issue 7.62mm x 51mm is a high power cartridge, as is the .30-06 Springfield cartridge, also known as the 7.62mm x 63mm. The intermediate cartridge has less range and less foot pounds of force at the same ranges as a high power cartridge and the high power cartridge will allow for much greater ranges.

    Its relevant because it completely disproves your calling the '03 Springfield bolt action rifle and the M1 Garand assault rifles. That's why nomenclature is important and why your total lack of understanding that makes you nothing more than a propagandist.



    The facts, try getting some.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  5. #480
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,687

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chenzo View Post
    Different circumstances. You're talking about one man, who clearly had some issues, turning and firing on fellow soldiers. I'm talking a platoon of soldiers being ordered to turn their weapons on civilians who don't comply. Sounds feasible? Not in my eyes.
    Gotcha. I'd agree with you on that.
    Chenzo likes this.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  6. #481
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,207

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    No I don't. Yet we are constantly being told by conspiracy wackos that is why the citizens need to be armed with the most powerful weapons they can acquire.

    Just a few posts past yours is this from Bull321:



    Which is it? Should we fear our own government or not? I would like you guys to get on the same page.
    The fact is the Founding Fathers feared the possibility of a tyrannical turn in our own government and that is why they included the Second Ammendment. It has nothing to do with hunting, or self defense or anything else. It is about being able to protect themselves from their very own government if it goes astray. The truth is the military has 2 jobs to protect our safety from foreign invaders and to uphold the constitution. If they turn on the citizenry they are involved in an illegal activity.

    In fact the Founding Fathers believed it was so important they wrote about it in their personal papers.

    Name:  293979_437508062985491_1573580765_n.jpg
Views: 91
Size:  24.7 KBName:  429573_355292707900724_1114663097_n.jpg
Views: 86
Size:  16.2 KBName:  321027_194121387392967_1563295535_n.jpg
Views: 93
Size:  27.2 KBName:  528721_398185326917765_1656895573_n.jpg
Views: 89
Size:  58.9 KBName:  25046_180367365435036_1224590301_n.jpg
Views: 89
Size:  47.9 KB
    BULL321 likes this.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  7. #482
    MembersZone Subscriber
    BULL321's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Western, NC
    Posts
    3,432

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    No I don't. Yet we are constantly being told by conspiracy wackos that is why the citizens need to be armed with the most powerful weapons they can acquire.
    If you believe that our Founding Fathers were/are "conspiracy wackos" then I am more than proud to be counted amongst them
    Just a few posts past yours is this from Bull321:

    Which is it? Should we fear our own government or not? I would like you guys to get on the same page.
    If your talking about politicians like some of the far leaning liberals, then yes I do fear my government.
    FyredUp likes this.
    Stay Safe
    Bull


    “Guys if you get hurt, we’ll help you. If you get sick we’ll treat you. If you want to bitch and moan, then all I can tell you is to flick the sand out of your slit, suck it up or get the hell out!”
    - Capt. Marc Cox CFD

    Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result.
    -WINSTON CHURCHILL

  8. #483
    MembersZone Subscriber
    BULL321's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Western, NC
    Posts
    3,432

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I believe my "expert" more than you.
    Where is your "expert" getting his ammo at? I'd love to have the same for my Colt M-16 that I carry at work.
    FyredUp and DeputyMarshal like this.
    Stay Safe
    Bull


    “Guys if you get hurt, we’ll help you. If you get sick we’ll treat you. If you want to bitch and moan, then all I can tell you is to flick the sand out of your slit, suck it up or get the hell out!”
    - Capt. Marc Cox CFD

    Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result.
    -WINSTON CHURCHILL

  9. #484
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Bossier Parrish, Louisiana
    Posts
    10,639

    Default

    "A man with a gun is a citizen. A man without a gun is a servant."

    Just another quote from those silly Founding Fathers.
    FyredUp and BULL321 like this.
    Train to fight the fires you fight.

  10. #485
    Forum Member
    DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I believe my "expert" more than you.
    Your "expert" either doesn't know what he's talking about or he knows you're ignorant on the subject and gullible enough to swallow his tall tales. Pick one.
    FyredUp and Chenzo like this.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  11. #486
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,207

    Default

    You have to know how far off base SCfire is when so many of us are agreeing with LA!!
    RFDACM02, BULL321 and Chenzo like this.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  12. #487
    Forum Member
    Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,687

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    "A man with a gun is a citizen. A man without a gun is a servant."

    Just another quote from those silly Founding Fathers.
    What might a woman be? You know, according to those all knowing, never needing a change Founding Fathers....

    (oh wait, they added that later...)
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  13. #488
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,247

    Default

    Name:  150665_323103737799844_673548264_n.jpg
Views: 54
Size:  40.7 KB

    This simple picture describes the root of this problem.
    DeputyMarshal and RFDACM02 like this.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  14. #489
    MembersZone Subscriber
    BULL321's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Western, NC
    Posts
    3,432

    Default

    Its because the law goes out of its way to protect the subjects on the fringes, Those in the Middle make the easiest target.
    Stay Safe
    Bull


    “Guys if you get hurt, we’ll help you. If you get sick we’ll treat you. If you want to bitch and moan, then all I can tell you is to flick the sand out of your slit, suck it up or get the hell out!”
    - Capt. Marc Cox CFD

    Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result.
    -WINSTON CHURCHILL

  15. #490
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,207

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bones42 View Post
    What might a woman be? You know, according to those all knowing, never needing a change Founding Fathers....

    (oh wait, they added that later...)
    Actually to this day, our all knowing politicians from both parties have avoided dealing with equal rights for women as a Constitutional issue. No Ammendment to provide for equal rights has been pressed for in decades and their is no current pressure to get it done either. So what your smug little rip at the Founding Fathers actually does is point out a 226 year old national embarassment that women are still not seen as equal in our country. Just so you know where the 226 year number comes from the Constitution was signed in 1787, with the original Ammendments added in 1789.

    Further, US society has evolved and will contnue to evolve. When the Constitution was written the US was a male dominated society, as was much of the world, so it would have been logical for them to write it in such a manner. Today it would be written gender neutral and in fact the Equal Rights Ammendment should be written to show that any reference to man or men in the original Constitution would now be considered as gender neutral.

    Nice diversionary attempt. Realize though it has nothing to do with the original topic. But then again when you can't actually factually discuss the real topic diversion is the only hope to stop the facts from destroying your argument.
    Last edited by FyredUp; 01-15-2013 at 04:24 PM.
    Chenzo likes this.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  16. #491
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LaFireEducator View Post
    "A man with a gun is a citizen. A man without a gun is a servant."

    Just another quote from those silly Founding Fathers.
    Only a fool believes that today's servants would stand a chance against the modern military might of our nation. Assuming the leadership had the loyalty of the military to turn on the citizenry.

    Your dreams will never hurt you.

    Then again, coming from someone like you, I'm not surprised.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  17. #492
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,207

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Only a fool believes that today's servants would stand a chance against the modern military might of our nation. Assuming the leadership had the loyalty of the military to turn on the citizenry.

    Your dreams will never hurt you.

    Then again, coming from someone like you, I'm not surprised.
    If the military turns its might on the citizenry: 1) It is illegal, and since you believe laws are followed unquestioned by that reasoning alone it won't happen, 2) NO ONE will ever be free again as a citizen of the United States because once this happens a protracted guerilla war will begin and it will never end. Hence the military will remain in control of the country and we will live under essentially Martial Law.

    Just remember before you get too cocky, Afghany Jihadists are still active and still killing US troops a decade into the war. If technology could do it all it would see our vast superiority in that area would have long ago crushed the resistance and the war would be over. It still takes ground pouding troops on the ground to effect final victory and occupation of conquered territory. Further I simpyl refuse to believe that a majority of the military, including the command staff would support attacking and killing US citizens. Now I would bet that mercenaries, and rats, would come out of the wood work looking to work for the governent doing their dirty work. But not the military...
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  18. #493
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    1,185

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Only a fool believes that today's servants would stand a chance against the modern military might of our nation. Assuming the leadership had the loyalty of the military to turn on the citizenry.

    Your dreams will never hurt you.

    Then again, coming from someone like you, I'm not surprised.
    The Posse Comitatus Act of 1879 prohibits Federal Troops from doing that. I'm not surprised you didn't know that.

  19. #494
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by johnsb View Post
    The Posse Comitatus Act of 1879 prohibits Federal Troops from doing that. I'm not surprised you didn't know that.
    This is one of those statements that makes me say to myself, "how cute!"

    Assuming tyranny has taken hold of the leadership of our nation to the point where it is exercising that type of oppression over the citizenry, do you believe they are going to respect that law? Or any other for that matter? More importantly, who is going to enforce it?
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  20. #495
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    If the military turns its might on the citizenry: 1) It is illegal, and since you believe laws are followed unquestioned by that reasoning alone it won't happen, 2) NO ONE will ever be free again as a citizen of the United States because once this happens a protracted guerilla war will begin and it will never end. Hence the military will remain in control of the country and we will live under essentially Martial Law.
    Who says it will be protracted? You're dreaming.

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Just remember before you get too cocky, Afghany Jihadists are still active and still killing US troops a decade into the war. If technology could do it all it would see our vast superiority in that area would have long ago crushed the resistance and the war would be over. It still takes ground pouding troops on the ground to effect final victory and occupation of conquered territory. Further I simpyl refuse to believe that a majority of the military, including the command staff would support attacking and killing US citizens. Now I would bet that mercenaries, and rats, would come out of the wood work looking to work for the governent doing their dirty work. But not the military...
    The difference being is the US military is fanatical about avoiding casualties to innocent civilians. In this case civilians would be the target enabling the military to lay waste to entire areas without any regard.

    The only way your scenario remotely works is if an outside power is willing to incur the wrath of the US by aiding the guerillas waging the conflict.

    Keep dreaming about gun owners being the last stand against tyranny.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  21. #496
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    If the military turns its might on the citizenry: 1) It is illegal, and since you believe laws are followed unquestioned by that reasoning alone it won't happen, 2) NO ONE will ever be free again as a citizen of the United States because once this happens a protracted guerilla war will begin and it will never end. Hence the military will remain in control of the country and we will live under essentially Martial Law.
    Who says it will be protracted? You're dreaming.

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Just remember before you get too cocky, Afghany Jihadists are still active and still killing US troops a decade into the war. If technology could do it all it would see our vast superiority in that area would have long ago crushed the resistance and the war would be over. It still takes ground pouding troops on the ground to effect final victory and occupation of conquered territory. Further I simpyl refuse to believe that a majority of the military, including the command staff would support attacking and killing US citizens. Now I would bet that mercenaries, and rats, would come out of the wood work looking to work for the governent doing their dirty work. But not the military...
    The difference being is the US military is fanatical about avoiding casualties to innocent civilians. In this case civilians would be the target enabling the military to lay waste to entire areas without any regard. Again, reread what I wrote. Assuming those leadership had the loyalty of the military to the point where they would turn on the citizenry.

    The only way your scenario remotely works is if an outside power is willing to incur the wrath of the US by aiding the guerillas waging the conflict.

    Keep dreaming about gun owners being the last stand against tyranny.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  22. #497
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    If the military turns its might on the citizenry: 1) It is illegal, and since you believe laws are followed unquestioned by that reasoning alone it won't happen, 2) NO ONE will ever be free again as a citizen of the United States because once this happens a protracted guerilla war will begin and it will never end. Hence the military will remain in control of the country and we will live under essentially Martial Law.
    Who says it will be protracted? You're dreaming.

    Quote Originally Posted by FyredUp View Post
    Just remember before you get too cocky, Afghany Jihadists are still active and still killing US troops a decade into the war. If technology could do it all it would see our vast superiority in that area would have long ago crushed the resistance and the war would be over. It still takes ground pouding troops on the ground to effect final victory and occupation of conquered territory. Further I simpyl refuse to believe that a majority of the military, including the command staff would support attacking and killing US citizens. Now I would bet that mercenaries, and rats, would come out of the wood work looking to work for the governent doing their dirty work. But not the military...
    The difference being is the US military is fanatical about avoiding casualties to innocent civilians. In this case civilians would be the target enabling the military to lay waste to entire areas without any regard. Again, reread what I wrote. Assuming those leadership had the loyalty of the military to the point where they would turn on the citizenry.

    The only way your scenario remotely works is if an outside power is willing to incur the wrath of the US by aiding the guerillas waging the conflict.

    Keep dreaming about gun owners being the last stand against tyranny. I don't believe the military would turn against the citizenry, which makes that argument for gun ownership all the more ridiculous.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  23. #498
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,207

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    This is one of those statements that makes me say to myself, "how cute!"

    Assuming tyranny has taken hold of the leadership of our nation to the point where it is exercising that type of oppression over the citizenry, do you believe they are going to respect that law? Or any other for that matter? More importantly, who is going to enforce it?
    Oh this is hysterical. You clain I said that we shouldn't have laws because they aren't followed and tried to rip me a new one over it. Yet here you are claiming the government won't follow the laws that govern it. Clearly a case of talking out of both sides of your face...yet AGAIN.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

  24. #499
    Forum Member
    Chenzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Rural WI
    Posts
    1,247

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    This is one of those statements that makes me say to myself, "how cute!"

    Assuming tyranny has taken hold of the leadership of our nation to the point where it is exercising that type of oppression over the citizenry, do you believe they are going to respect that law? Or any other for that matter? More importantly, who is going to enforce it?
    This post right here... to quote you, is one of those statements that makes me say to myself "how cute." Either you're so wrapped up in the anti-gun, pro-Obama bulls|-|it, (possible) or you're just trolling (possible).

    So you're saying that laws are going to be ignored and essentially invalid, but you believe that the US Military will turn on it's citizenry?

    Assuming tyranny has taken control of the leadership of our nation to the point where it is exercising that type of oppression over the citizenry, do YOU, not any of your expert friends, not your sister, YOU, truly believe that SOLDIERS, people and CITIZENS of the United States of America, are going to take orders to turn their weapons on fellow citizens? More importantly, when the US Military disbands because of so many deserters refusing to follow asinine orders, who is going to turn their arms on us? Who will Obama bring in then to turn on us?

    Unlike my post on the definition of assault weapons, I'd appreciate it if you'd answer with, with a straight answer instead of using your ordinary diversion tactics.
    "A fire department that writes off civilians faster than an express line of 6 reasons or less is not progressive, it's dangerous, because it's run by fear. Fear does not save lives, it endangers them." -- Lt. Ray McCormack FDNY

    "Because if you don't think you're good, nobody else will." -- DC Tom Laun (ret) Syracuse

  25. #500
    Forum Member
    FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    10,207

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    Who says it will be protracted? You're dreaming.

    Oh, it would be. The fact that you as a sell out anti-gunner don't want to admit it shows once again your lack of knowledge on this topic.


    The difference being is the US military is fanatical about avoiding casualties to innocent civilians. In this case civilians would be the target enabling the military to lay waste to entire areas without any regard. Again, reread what I wrote. Assuming those leadership had the loyalty of the military to the point where they would turn on the citizenry.

    The point is simply this Joe Dogface isn't going to turn on his fellow citizens. He isn't going to kill his friends and neighbors, no matter what the orders are. I firmly believe that if the president ordered the military to take such action the military would revolt and refuse to do so en masse. It is one thing to kill a foreign people, in a foreign land, and quite another to kill Mr and Mrs American citizen.

    The only way your scenario remotely works is if an outside power is willing to incur the wrath of the US by aiding the guerillas waging the conflict.

    Not true at all. The military power would be our own military either deserting and bringing ther weaponry with them, or turning on the government and saying NO!

    Keep dreaming about gun owners being the last stand against tyranny. I don't believe the military would turn against the citizenry, which makes that argument for gun ownership all the more ridiculous.

    No, it really makes it even more viable. The fact is the guns are out there, in the hands of MILLIONS of armed citizens, and a revolt if pushed too far is entirely possible. Go read the gun blogs, go read the political blogs (other than the left wing ones you do that say everything is rosy), there are a lot of ****ed off people that have had enough of the government refusing to do what is right and instead doing political answers that solve nothing.

    You should be as concerned about loss of rights as the pro-gun crowd. Loss of any rights leads to all rights being in peril.
    You really need to inform yourself on this topic.
    Chenzo likes this.
    Crazy, but that's how it goes
    Millions of people living as foes
    Maybe it's not too late
    To learn how to love, and forget how to hate

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Shooting is West Palm Beach leaves firefighter, gunman dead.
    By SouthFlaHopeful in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-04-2008, 05:54 AM
  2. At least 2 dead in Kansas City mall shooting
    By RspctFrmCalgary in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-30-2007, 11:06 AM
  3. India-At Least 100 children dead
    By NJFFSA16 in forum Fire Wire
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-16-2004, 05:08 AM
  4. Children that cheered dead Americans
    By Waterboy620 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 09-12-2003, 05:01 PM
  5. Haysville, KS - 2 children dead
    By NJFFSA16 in forum Fire Wire
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-22-2002, 03:38 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register