Quote:
Originally Posted by ernie
^^^^
The guy I "shot" all afternoon at work yesterday has simply resorted to "well if the government become tyrannical then you'll all be sorry you don't have guns but I'll be happy because I have mine!"
My reply:
"I look forward to watching you battle a tank with your AR-15. This isn't a video game with damage meters. You aren't going to win. If tyranny ensues and that tyranny has control of the armed forces you're screwed. If they don't have control of the armed forces they're screwed. It ain't the 1800's anymore."
|
I think that they might argue that the insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan were fairly successful at tying up one of the most advanced armies in the world.
However if you look at it, it wasn't rifles and hand guns that caused the problems and tied up the military as much as it was a hidden enemy that used their own enemies explosives against them to make fairly advanced IEDs.
In the states it would be different as the U.S. for the most part has paved roads and infrastructure that would make it very difficult to hide mines.
In a straight out up and up gun battle with the U.S. army you will lose, especialy since their army got a hideous amount of experience in urban combat.
Plus I don't think some fat militia guy is any match for a Afghanistan tribes man who has been at war constantly for 30 or 40 or 50 years.