Attacks Cause Defenders to Dig In

[Guest]

David Hogg dubbed the "Best Gun Salesman Since Obama."

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/04/david_hogg_gun_salesman.html

 

[zil]

Makes perfect sense - scarcity increases value; fear of scarcity causes hording.  Or maybe people who never really felt a desire for a gun before, suddenly feel like pinning someone's face on a target and shooting at it for no particular reason.

[NeuroTypical]

Who?  David Hogg nothing.  The media loves a good sensational bubble story, but the foolish child will play out his ten minutes of fame and fade back into obscurity.   Got nothing but good wishes for his healing and grief and overcoming his traumas, but in the public marketplace of ideas, dude is little more than a tragic punching bag of ignorance and empty platitudes. 

If you're looking for a tragic school shooting survivor staying relevant, take a look at Patrick Neville.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/colorado-legislator-columbine-survivor-champions-legislation-expand-concealed-carry-school-zones/

Edited April 4, 2018 by NeuroTypical

[Guest]

2 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Got nothing but good wishes for his healing and grief and overcoming his traumas, but in the public marketplace of ideas, dude is little more than a tragic punching bag of ignorance and empty platitudes.

The thing is he was never near the areas where the gunman was.  He was simply huddled in a far corner of the school that was never in any danger.  Yeah, lots of trauma there.

[NeuroTypical]

Well, there's room for tender feelings here.  In my neck of the woods is the New Life Church, that experienced a shooting back 10 years ago.  My family and I got to know them a little over the last decade via homeschooling stuff.  The NLC community suffered as a whole, and individuals in that community experienced impacts even if they weren't in the near vicinity.  

A year or two later, my wife was there in the building when someone popped a balloon.  3 or 4 people hit the ground and started panicking.  I don't think they were actually there for the actual shooting, but they were certainly impacted.  

So yeah, I can have respect if dood tells me he's going through difficulties because of the shooting.  But no, having lived through something scary doesn't make you wise, or right, or even useful.

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Well, there's room for tender feelings here.  In my neck of the woods is the New Life Church, that experienced a shooting back 10 years ago.  My family and I got to know them a little over the last decade via homeschooling stuff.  The NLC community suffered as a whole, and individuals in that community experienced impacts even if they weren't in the near vicinity.  

A year or two later, my wife was there in the building when someone popped a balloon.  3 or 4 people hit the ground and started panicking.  I don't think they were actually there for the actual shooting, but they were certainly impacted.  

So yeah, I can have respect if dood tells me he's going through difficulties because of the shooting.  But no, having lived through something scary doesn't make you wise, or right, or even useful.

Forgive me NT.  But I think a lot of people are just wimps.  When I was on military bases that were getting bombed pretty much once a week, I didn't get all stressed out every time the siren went off and I had to get to the bunker.  Even the first time it happened, I just followed procedures. 

The one time I was shaken?  When I woke up to find my neighbor just missed having a soccer ball sized hole right through him, and another neighbor had his thumb and part of his hand ripped off by the same projectile.

Maybe I'm just jaded.  But I am not finding any expressions of trauma in anything he says or does.  He's just a selfish child hoping to score points with the liberal forces to become a $1MM speaker.  He thinks he's using the media to boost his future.   He's too ignorant and immature to realize that the media is just using him to be the barking dog of the day and will soon drop him like a bad transmission.  And so will Soros*.

* It was Soros' foundation that gave him the list of Ingram sponsors so he could tweet out the desire to boycott her show.

Edited April 4, 2018 by Guest

[Still_Small_Voice]

I think in the majority of most States Americans still believe in the Second Amendment.  There are about nine States that really infringe the people's right to keep and bear arms.  In my research I believe it is the following States:  California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island.  Vermont used to be a State that really respected Second Amendment Liberties but is just about to pass some terrible laws.

[Guest MormonGator]

15 hours ago, Still_Small_Voice said:

I think in the majority of most States Americans still believe in the Second Amendment.  There are about nine States that really infringe the people's right to keep and bear arms.  In my research I believe it is the following States:  California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island.  Vermont used to be a State that really respected Second Amendment Liberties but is just about to pass some terrible laws.

The people in Florida are mostly furious at Gov. Scott for signing that gun bill. He's basically annihilated his chance for senate. The base is outraged. 

Edited April 5, 2018 by MormonGator

[bytebear]

On 4/4/2018 at 3:21 PM, Still_Small_Voice said:

I think in the majority of most States Americans still believe in the Second Amendment.  There are about nine States that really infringe the people's right to keep and bear arms.  In my research I believe it is the following States:  California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island.  Vermont used to be a State that really respected Second Amendment Liberties but is just about to pass some terrible laws.

I think most politicians also believe in the 2nd amendment, but they swing toward what ever position will get them more votes.  Very few actually want to get rid of guns, honestly.  But they sure will use it as a contention point if they think it will bring out voters for them.

 

[Guest MormonGator]

45 minutes ago, bytebear said:

I think most politicians also believe in the 2nd amendment, but they swing toward what ever position will get them more votes.  Very few actually want to get rid of guns, honestly.  But they sure will use it as a contention point if they think it will bring out voters for them.

 

Oh I think many, many politicians would ban guns in a heartbeat.  

[Guest]

Interesting video.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myVfrDlYWoU

Side-by-side comparison of Hogg's words vs Kashuv's words.  Who's Kashuv?  Well, look at the video.

Hogg: Cusses, yells, raises fists, chaismatic, smooth talking, more attractive, either trained or natural public speaker, very eloquent, uses rhetoric and accusation.

Kashuv: Soft spoken, measured and reasoned, uses polite language, maybe a bit slow of speech, not as eloquent, a bit less attractive, uses compassion and facts.

From whom do you hear the still small voice?

[Still_Small_Voice]

Here is a thought on the Second Amendment I just recently read and I think it is accurate.

The “militia” the framers had in mind was independent of the government. Today the National Guard and reserves are government entities.  They may or may not stand up to unlawful government orders.  Our Founding Fathers knew that a citizen militia couldn’t win a war against a government.  While the Minute men were successful against the English at Lexington and Concord, they couldn’t defeat a professional army.  They fought bravely at Bunker Hill, but were defeated.  What an armed citizen militia could do was to discourage government overreach and, if necessary, give their side time to build a force that could win.

[Grunt]

2 hours ago, Still_Small_Voice said:

 

Here is a thought on the Second Amendment I just recently read and I think it is accurate.

The “militia” the framers had in mind was independent of the government. Today the National Guard and reserves are government entities.  They may or may not stand up to unlawful government orders.  Our Founding Fathers knew that a citizen militia couldn’t win a war against a government.  While the Minute men were successful against the English at Lexington and Concord, they couldn’t defeat a professional army.  They fought bravely at Bunker Hill, but were defeated.  What an armed citizen militia could do was to discourage government overreach and, if necessary, give their side time to build a force that could win.

Why couldn't a citizen militia win a war against a government?

[zil]

6 minutes ago, Grunt said:

Why couldn't a citizen militia win a war against a government?

[Grunt]

1 minute ago, zil said:

What does that mean?  

[zil]

6 minutes ago, Grunt said:

What does that mean?  

It means the government has tanks and helicopters and missiles and we've got handguns and rifles (though I suspect some of us have more, it doesn't compare).

(You didn't ask, so I didn't say, but I expect we're all hoping that more than a few of the boots on the ground who control the tanks, helicopters, and missiles would refuse to use them against fellow Americans, and might well turn them the other direction instead.)

[Grunt]

10 minutes ago, zil said:

It means the government has tanks and helicopters and missiles and we've got handguns and rifles (though I suspect some of us have more, it doesn't compare).

(You didn't ask, so I didn't say, but I expect we're all hoping that more than a few of the boots on the ground who control the tanks, helicopters, and missiles would refuse to use them against fellow Americans, and might well turn them the other direction instead.)

Got it, thanks.  First, an insurgent force is VERY effective against a standing army.  Even more so when that standing army is fighting friends and neighbors.  Many members, to include Guard units that HAVE tanks, helicopters, and missiles would split sides.  It wouldn't just be John Boy and his daddy's shotgun against an apache.  Likely, however, much of it would depend on the reason for the war.  That will decide which side many fall on.

[Guest]

About 500,000 hunting licenses are issued each year in the State of Texas.  I don't know what percent is for rifle hunting of large game.  But I reckon it is a large chunk.

Many who can hunt large game develop shooting skills similar to snipers.  I, myself, can shoot a penny to nickel sized target at 300 yards.  I'm not just  bragging.  I'd be a lot of hunters can shoot that accurately.  300 yards does not a sniper make.  But you can shoot sensitive spots on heavy equipment (like tanks and apaches) from quite a ways away with that kind of shooting.

I wouldn't be so quick to think that an armed citizenry of 50 million wouldn't be able to defeat the standing army of 2 million even when the latter has technology and armaments on their side.  John Moses Browning really did a lot to level the playing field.

[NightSG]

2 hours ago, Carborendum said:

About 500,000 hunting licenses are issued each year in the State of Texas.  I don't know what percent is for rifle hunting of large game.  But I reckon it is a large chunk.

Likely most of it; while you technically need a hunting license to go pop a few rabbits or squirrels for the table, I seriously doubt that most people would bother if that's all they're doing.  And you have to figure there are a lot of people like me, who only bother to renew in years we actually expect to have the time and place to hunt; that's maybe 2-3 years out of every ten for me.

2 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Many who can hunt large game develop shooting skills similar to snipers.  I, myself, can shoot a penny to nickel sized target at 300 yards.  I'm not just  bragging.  I'd be a lot of hunters can shoot that accurately.  300 yards does not a sniper make.  But you can shoot sensitive spots on heavy equipment (like tanks and apaches) from quite a ways away with that kind of shooting.

Helicopters are pretty much made of sensitive spots, and an old .30-06 Enfield or Garand is an armor piercing weapon by most standards.

 

[Vort]

I think the bet is that government would not have the stomach to slaughter 100,000 to 1,000,000 "outlaws with guns". Even if the corrupt politicians were willing to pull the trigger (so to speak), the fallback bet is that most of the soldiers in the armed forces will desert or mutiny rather than kill their own citizens.

[Guest]

10 hours ago, NightSG said:

an old .30-06 Enfield or Garand is an armor piercing weapon by most standards.

I've got a Browning .30-06.  It's equipped with a Leupold scope that is perfectly zeroed to 300 yards.  I can only practice very infrequently with that due to cost of ammunition.  But it is easy with a non-moving target.  I just need to work on moving targets.  But, correct me if I'm wrong, I was under the impression that it is only considered armor piercing with heavier moose rounds instead of the lighter 150gr rounds.

My SKS uses much cheaper ammunition.  I only have a site, no scope.  I don't need it for closer range.  I'll go through several boxes of that in a practice session.

And I just got a tip yesterday on a long distance range from a client of mine.  I'm going to try to go there tonight for date night.  WOO-HOO!!

[anatess2]

16 hours ago, zil said:

People Power Revolution of 1986 shows that this is not very effective in a Civil War.  A government wouldn't wipe out the governed in a Civil War.  Rather, they defend against a hostile take-over or secession.  Wiping out the governed defeats the purpose of having a government.  So, the military tactic in a Civil War is door-to-door targeting of insurgency leadership to take the head out of the rebellion.

[anatess2]

"One of the drawbacks of being a young crusader is the inability to predict complex cause-and-effect reactions.  Everything seems so simple and clear when you are young and ignorant of human nature and cannot fathom in the least the ways of thinking of people who disagree with you."

True that.

[anatess2]

10 hours ago, Vort said:

I think the bet is that government would not have the stomach to slaughter 100,000 to 1,000,000 "outlaws with guns". Even if the corrupt politicians were willing to pull the trigger (so to speak), the fallback bet is that most of the soldiers in the armed forces will desert or mutiny rather than kill their own citizens.

Well, most soldiers are 2A defenders so it's not just that they don't have the stomach to kill their own citizens, they're more than likely going to rebel against such an attack on the Constitution.

[NightSG]

17 hours ago, Carborendum said:

I've got a Browning .30-06.  It's equipped with a Leupold scope that is perfectly zeroed to 300 yards.  I can only practice very infrequently with that due to cost of ammunition.  But it is easy with a non-moving target.  I just need to work on moving targets.  But, correct me if I'm wrong, I was under the impression that it is only considered armor piercing with heavier moose rounds instead of the lighter 150gr rounds.

A lot of the surplus ammo you can find in .30-06 or .308 is steel core AP.  Sometimes it's mixed in with other projectile types, but easily picked out with a strong magnet.

Also, a basic single-stage reloading setup for one or two calibers can be had for a fair bit less than a good rifle.  Even cheaper if you can find the press and dies used.  Just don't skimp on finding good case lube or you'll spend most of your time trying to peel ruined brass out of the sizing die.

Of course, if you really want to punch through body armor, .45-70 (if you can. get a .45-110 so you can shoot either round) with a 510 grain bullet may not penetrate, but the dents it left in the clay backing strongly suggested the wearer wouldn't be getting up any time soon.  It's also known to be pretty good against engine blocks, buffalo, etc.