Comments
Follow Comments Sorted by time
deleted
· 5 years ago
· FIRST
1 guy isn't, but a 100 million people will. Not to mention that most of the military wouldn't want to fire on its own people.
8
·
Edited 5 years ago
sir_spiderman
· 5 years ago
A little known fact, but the military is full of millions of trained professionals each of whom can easily kill a few dozen armed citizens before having even a moderately high dance of injury. That's not considering planes, tanks, riot squads, and the many, many other reasons why any military of one hundred members could easily kill 10,000 armed citizens.
▼
deleted
· 5 years ago
Dude are you high? No military, not even our own, is that good. And those members would not like firing on civilians, armed or not, ESPECIALLY their own. There would be a metric fuckton of defections.
1
Show All
sir_spiderman
· 5 years ago
I think you're the high one. Tell you what, go grab all the weapons and armor you want. Tell me how well you'd survive an air strike. You wouldn't even have enough time to run out of your very limited supply of ammo.
▼
deleted
· 5 years ago
Piss in bleach bottles. Chlorine gas. Also that's not the point. Our military doesn't like civilian casualties in other countries, let alone our own. Soldiers aren't just robots that when told to shoot, they shoot, they're thinking beings too.
·
Edited 5 years ago
sir_spiderman
· 5 years ago
Use your big boy grammar
▼
wongilicious
· 5 years ago
I just like the words "metric fuckton"
1
matthewg
· 5 years ago
What red-blooded American doesn't?
companion
· 5 years ago
if a bunch of guys hiding in the desert with soviet era rifles can cause huge issues for the US military I'm sure a couple million people with modern weapons along with a large quantity of defecting US soldiers with whatever weapons they can bring with them can do some major damage. Another example is the Vietnam war, bunch of rice farmers conscripted and given WW2 era weapons can actually push the US military out. The entire point of the second amendment is so that in the event of the government becoming tyrannical the populace can take the country back.
6
sir_spiderman
· 5 years ago
A bunch of rice farmers that were given moderate military training and military grade equipment that maybe 0.0001% of the normal population will have and an even lower percentage that can adequately use said equipment.
guest
· 5 years ago
If we take the idiotic "reasoning" behind these kinds of insipid comments to it's logical conclusion we find that we must ban all automobiles that are capable of exceeding any local soeed limits. After all if I don't NEED a rifle capable of firing more than one shot (or whatever inane and arbitrary threshold these ever so erudite gun banners want to come up with to permit or deny my constitutionally protected rights) then you sure as hell don't NEED that miltary grade Prius that is capable of 100 miles an hour. Fuck off with that bullshit of you thinking you know what I should be permitted to own or what I should be permitted to say. And you'd better believe that we sure as hell will rise up against our own government (again) if it ever overreaches it's power and tries to take our guns. And if that day should ever come all I can say is God have mercy on anyone who tries to enter my home with such intentions, because I won't.
4
matthewg
· 5 years ago
Calm down, LaPierre. Nobody is trying to ban guns.
rosalinas
· 5 years ago
I'm so upset that no one tags me
