🚀 go-pugleaf

I would rather shoot a deranged "militia" wacko rather than a trained
professional marine in the instance of an uprising.  There is no way that
the civilians can subdue the military.  The military would come out with
overwhelming force, and scare the shit out of these wackos--sending them
back to hibernate in their cabins! -:)
-- 
shaskivich said so!!!

TxDude <rduncan@ticnet.com> wrote in article
<35fabb7e.3461272592@news.mci2000.com>...
> On Tue, 28 Jul 1998 11:02:06 GMT, gworley@brokersys.com (George Worley)
wrote:
> 
> >Do you know how long it would take for the Military to squash a
> >citizen uprising?  Not very long.  DO YOU REMEMBER KENT STATE?
> 
> Sure do.....Garand rifles against unarmed college students....not a good
> analogy.
> 
> >For his way of government he is correct.  The ideals of this nation
> >prevent that.  99.9 percent of the citizens of this great nation feel
> >that we have best way of government.
> 
> 
> 
> >Even with the guns we have now, it is no match against the weapons
> >that our military has.
> 
> Yea, tell that to the US military after VietNam.....or how about the
Russians
> after Afghanistan. The United States has 120 metropolitan areas with
> populations of over a million. There is no possible way to spread the
military
> over a country this size and subdue 60 million gun-owners while leaving
> the land intact.......and they won't use nukes. Believe me......if the
people
> of this country were pushed to fight for their lives and
freedom.......the
> military would lose.
> 
> >Again misguided.  If the elections were called off and uprising begin,
> >the ones in control of the military would have the upperhand.
> 
> Assuming that those in the military will blindly follow the new dictator.
> Which I can tell you they will not. 74% of the marines questioned in 
> the 29 Palms survey said they "WOULD NOT" fire on Americans
> who refused to give up their guns......if gun confiscation were ordered. 
> 
> >These illegal militias full of malcontents and criminals where set up
> >to destroy our way life not defend it.
> 
> So you personally know some of these people? How can demanding
> that my Constitutional rights not be infringed be "destroying your way
> of life"? Obviously you let the evening news do your thinking for you.
> I have met many militia members in the state of Texas, and I wouldn't
> classify any of them as dangerous, paranoid, or criminal.
> 
> >First off there isn't a civilian militia that strong.  Our forefathers
> >didn't put the Second Amendment in place for purpose of taken arms (in
> >that era arms meant muskets)   against our own government.  This is
> >treason.  And treason will be dealt with accordingly.
> 
> It's all part of the checks and balances of our government.
> I like to think of the militia (armed populace) as part of the integral
> defense of this country. As ex-military....I don't think  duty ends
> when the uniform comes off.
> 
> The Second Amendment is a recognition of the danger of standing
> armies. Its purpose is to recognize that every citizen has the right
> to keep and bear the same type of basic arms as a soldier in a modern
> military. A militia embodies all able-bodied men over the age of
> sixteen. Therefore, a militia will always outnumber a standing army by
> at least twenty to one. If this militia is armed with weapons similar
> to those used by the individuals comprising the standing army, it will
> be impossible for that standing army to inflict The will of a
> tyrannical government upon the people. The Second  Amendment is the
> guarantee behind all the other article in the Bill of Rights. It
> is the ultimate guarantee that citizens in the United Stares will
> remain free.
> -
>        "Liberty is the only thing you cannot have
>         unless you are willing to give it to others." 
> 
>