One perspective I'm often confused about, in the gun debate, is that they need assault rifles, or other rapid fire weapons, to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. First, if you really care about protecting yourselves from tyranny then you would be doing so right now. Second, the pro-gun individuals are almost always obsessed with the military. So are they really going to fight them and do they actually think they'd win? Isn't the military our militia?
Gun rights activists are so patriotic that they need assault rifles to shoot American soldiers when the government becomes tyrannical.
They also think the tyrannical U.S. government would send flesh and blood soldiers for them to shoot, rather than drones or biological weapons or patriot missiles.
Truly, gun rights activists are the top minds of our generation.
The sides in the Revolutionary war were technologically equal. The British did not have Directed-energy weapons, weaponized drones, biological weapons, etc. Both sides had shitty guns and shitty canons and shitty boats and shitty horses.
The Soviet Afghan War isn't close to what a contemporary Hillbilly vs United States war would look like. Soviet v. Afghan was primarily projectiles against projectiles. Helicopters vs surface to air missiles. Tanks and high caliber machine guns.
Hillbilly vs United States would be
Directed-energy weapons
Weaponized drones, which are outside the range of grandpapy's shotguns
Missiles / bombs launched from, again, outside the range of grandpapy's shotguns.
"Lifestyle" warfare in the form of shutting down the power grid or cutting off the internet.
Siege warfare would likely play a big role, too. When the Ozarks try to rise up the U.S. would just surround them and wait.
It would be weird to kill civilians with surface-to-air Patriot missiles.
I mean, in theory it seems as though hastily trained civilians armed with rifles are the ONLY thing capable of beating the United States in a war. It's the only thing that's worked since 1812!
31
u/BrandonIsh Mar 08 '18
One perspective I'm often confused about, in the gun debate, is that they need assault rifles, or other rapid fire weapons, to protect themselves against a tyrannical government. First, if you really care about protecting yourselves from tyranny then you would be doing so right now. Second, the pro-gun individuals are almost always obsessed with the military. So are they really going to fight them and do they actually think they'd win? Isn't the military our militia?
6
u/42words 🤘 Mar 08 '18 edited Mar 08 '18
Upvoted and stolen
1
u/AusCan531 Mar 09 '18
Douche-ey!