Message from @Fergus Bahr

Discord ID: 440604301140951050


2018-04-30 19:53:13 UTC  

I need a full image of this auuuugh

2018-04-30 19:53:19 UTC  

Crop is so bad <:GWnanamiKonataCry:405043507544457226>

2018-04-30 19:53:27 UTC  

Hi chat

2018-04-30 19:53:40 UTC  

Yeah but here's a thing though, militias are a small group.

2018-04-30 19:53:55 UTC  

Civilians are a way bigger group.

2018-04-30 19:54:16 UTC  

And if 60% of people will rise up, they could simply overthrow the goverment.

2018-04-30 19:54:27 UTC  

Also army is not 100% certain to stay within goverment's reach in that case.

2018-04-30 19:55:36 UTC  

Well I mean yeah.

2018-04-30 19:55:51 UTC  

But civilians will never get any ground to air complexes or anything like that.

2018-04-30 19:57:17 UTC  

Stealing from military bases in first world is almost impossible since penalty for it is life in prison or excution and they're guarded to shit.

2018-04-30 19:57:44 UTC  

What I'm getting at is that civilians having more or less modern firearms isn't meant to be practical, it's meant to be a constant reminder to the state not to fuck with people to much or there will be blood.

2018-04-30 19:57:50 UTC  

And state is not usually willing to take the chance.

2018-04-30 20:00:01 UTC  

? ? ?

2018-04-30 20:00:32 UTC  

Are there dictators in US

2018-04-30 20:01:59 UTC  

I wouldn't say it's the main reason, I'd say main reason is to fight against overwhelming opression in case if such arrives.

2018-04-30 20:02:11 UTC  

The point of the Second Amendment is to refill the Freedom Meter™️ if our gov’t gets overthrown, it’s a failsafe for the current gov’t.

2018-04-30 20:02:14 UTC  

I think they were going off "If brits come back people should have guns to kill them" when they wrote that.

2018-04-30 20:02:54 UTC  

Without weapons a populus is unable to fight against their government.

2018-04-30 20:03:06 UTC  

At this point of time even with it's not.

2018-04-30 20:03:32 UTC  

At least not in countries with solid armed forces.

2018-04-30 20:04:11 UTC  

Well military has access to fun things like WOMD's and chemical warfare.

2018-04-30 20:04:48 UTC  

True, but you don't need to kill them all around America

2018-04-30 20:04:53 UTC  

You need to push them out of cities and secure roads

2018-04-30 20:05:04 UTC  

Psst

2018-04-30 20:05:04 UTC  

Sure there will be levels of insurgency in the forrests but who cares.

2018-04-30 20:05:09 UTC  

Psssssst

2018-04-30 20:05:16 UTC  

Mr e

2018-04-30 20:05:39 UTC  

Out of cities?

2018-04-30 20:05:41 UTC  

Bomb them

2018-04-30 20:05:51 UTC  

Hmmmm

2018-04-30 20:05:54 UTC  

Ever heard about second siege of Grozny?

2018-04-30 20:05:55 UTC  

Mr eeeee

2018-04-30 20:06:06 UTC  

Oof Grozny

2018-04-30 20:07:18 UTC  

The US military has proven itself so far to be quite incompetent at suppressing guerrilla campaigns, example A being Vietnam. And with areas that are rather similar in climate to Vietnam being inside the country, like the Deep South, the US army would have a hell of a time trying to fight there.

2018-04-30 20:07:37 UTC  

@K▲ISER Vietnam had a good army though

2018-04-30 20:07:47 UTC  

You gotta take in account that Vietnamese found a bunch of wars beforehand

2018-04-30 20:07:59 UTC  

And they already had a lot of systems like tunnels ready before US arrival.

2018-04-30 20:08:05 UTC  

And ultimately vietnamese still lost in numbers.

2018-04-30 20:08:40 UTC  

I would say it's more about pushing guerilla troops out of main points and securing them

2018-04-30 20:08:56 UTC  

They can take everything else, it doesn't matter, what are they going to do with forrests or mountain areas.

2018-04-30 20:09:27 UTC  

Chechnya still maintains a solid level of insurgency within mountain ranges to this day, but there is no fighting, because as soon as they see someone in the mountain with AK they just blast them.