Armed resistance

[Doc]

One has to wonder what would have happened if the Libyan people had weapons to overthrow Gaddafi or the Syrian resistance had guns to over throw Assad. Oh well I guess we will never know !!

[Juggernaut Nihilism]

I fail to see how the English experience of the 16th century is relevant at all to the 21st century world. The Economist has a more sober take on it:

Militia are hopelessly inadequate as a means of defending a free country. While "people's war" militia-based strategies have been employed to wear down invading armies in numerous countries over the past century, not one of those countries (Vietnam, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iraq, southern Lebanon, etc) is "free". This is not an accident of history. Freedom is the product of orderly democratic governance and the rule of law. Popular militias are overwhelming likely to foster not democracy or the rule of law, but warlordism, tribalism and civil war. In Lebanon, Pakistan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mali, Colombia, the Palestinian Territories and elsewhere, we see that militias of armed private citizens rip apart weak democratic states in order to prey upon local populations in authoritarian sub-states or fiefdoms. Free states are defended by standing armies, not militias, because free states enjoy the consent of the governed, which allows them to maintain effective standing armies. Like every other free country apart from Costa Rica, the United States has a standing army in times of peace, and has since 1791, when the founding fathers realised a standing army would be necessary to fight the irregular popular militias of the continent's Native American peoples. (Guess who won?)

As crummy as popular militias have proven at defending against "sudden foreign invasions", they've been even worse at defending against "domestic usurpations of power by rulers". There is, I think, not a single case in modern history, certainly not since the invention of the Gatling gun. No popular militia has ever prevented the seizure of power by an authoritarian ruler. In countries with well-established democratic traditions, authoritarian takeovers are rare; when they occur, popular militias do not resist, or are ruthlessly crushed by national armed forces. In countries with weak democratic traditions, authoritarian takeovers sometimes go smoothly, or in other cases touch off periods of civil war, which are resolved when one faction finally defeats the others and imposes authoritarian rule. Name your authoritarian takeover: Germany, Japan, Russia, China, Egypt, Libya, Brazil, Greece, Spain, Indonesia, the Philippines, Iran, Chile, Argentina, Czechoslovakia, Syria—popular militias never resist authoritarian takeover and preserve democracy or civil freedoms. That is a thing that happens in silly movies. It is not a thing that happens in the world.

"It's different this ti... ouch! Who put that there? What do you mean it's always been there? I would have seen it!"

[Demon of Undoing]

Listening to an economist about war is like listening to a chef about plumbing.

The point of an armed citizenry as a bulwark against tyranny is, simply put, to create more chaos for the tyrant than it is worth. Historic examples in this case do not exist, as there is no model that closely approximates our own. This is the case in virtually every category of arms, violence, crime, and law with which one would choose to compare America.

[Ibrahim]

Listening to an economist about war is like listening to a chef about plumbing.

More to the point, The Economist is a don't-rock-the-boat pro-capitalist status quo publication. They aren't interested in all the grubby plebs arming themselves, especially in cases where the plebs aren't market-friendly.

The point of an armed citizenry as a bulwark against tyranny is, simply put, to create more chaos for the tyrant than it is worth. Historic examples in this case do not exist, as there is no model that closely approximates our own. This is the case in virtually every category of arms, violence, crime, and law with which one would choose to compare America.

The Swiss have been playing this game longer than anyone, are armed to the teeth, and use a militia system.

[Zack Morris]

One has to wonder what would have happened if the Libyan people had weapons to overthrow Gaddafi or the Syrian resistance had guns to over throw Assad. Oh well I guess we will never know !!

What happened is right wingers suddenly became very concerned about exactly who had access to weapons. As if not everyone should be trusted with military grade weapons like SAMs. Strange idea.

[Zack Morris]

The point of an armed citizenry as a bulwark against tyranny is, simply put, to create more chaos for the tyrant than it is worth. Historic examples in this case do not exist, as there is no model that closely approximates our own. This is the case in virtually every category of arms, violence, crime, and law with which one would choose to compare America.

There are plenty of historical examples of militias -- armed and organized citizens -- wreaking havoc. An armed citizenry was never likely the key ingredient to democracy and if ever and anywhere it was, it is certainly not the case today. It's completely absurd to suggest that I should be allowed to own anti-aircraft weaponry and if you agree with that statement, then there is no longer an argument in favor of unrestricted access to guns. Either citizens can amass private military-grade arsenals or all weapons can be regulated.

[Mr. Perfect]

Citizens should be able to amass military grade weapons, whatever that may be. Someday I hope someone defines military grade weapons. Seeing how my primary weapons are better than military weapons I hope we get better than military grade weapons.

The Iraq militias weren't half bad at what they did.

[Endovelico]

There is a difference between a militia and citizens being allowed to have guns. A militia is a citizen's army, made up of non-professionals who give some of their time and effort to bear weapons for the defense of the community. But it is an organized, trained, and properly equipped body. The Swiss model is indeed the closest I know to an efficient militia, and I would be very much in favour of adopting it, although with some minor changes.

[monster_gardener]

The point of an armed citizenry as a bulwark against tyranny is, simply put, to create more chaos for the tyrant than it is worth. Historic examples in this case do not exist, as there is no model that closely approximates our own. This is the case in virtually every category of arms, violence, crime, and law with which one would choose to compare America.

There are plenty of historical examples of militias -- armed and organized citizens -- wreaking havoc. An armed citizenry was never likely the key ingredient to democracy and if ever and anywhere it was, it is certainly not the case today. It's completely absurd to suggest that I should be allowed to own anti-aircraft weaponry and if you agree with that statement, then there is no longer an argument in favor of unrestricted access to guns. Either citizens can amass private military-grade arsenals or all weapons can be regulated.

Thank You Very Much for Your post, Zack.

It's completely absurd to suggest that I should be allowed to own anti-aircraft weaponry and if you agree with that statement, then there is no longer an argument in favor of unrestricted access to guns.

With all due respect, Zack, it is NOT absurd.

Remembering during WW2 when well armed Sweden managed to remain Neutral and Not Invaded by the Euroz of Germany....

Still the Luffwaffe Louts Liked to Strafe Swedish Ships & Shipping Simply for Silly Smiles, Laughs and Giggles back at the OKW Corral

So Sweden let its Merchant Marine Officers have anti-aircraft guns as their Personal Side Arms .........

Soon the Luftwaffe Louts Laughed Less.......

And Since this was Simply a Seaside Brawl Between Swedish Sailors at Sea and Airedale Sons of Bitches no official conflict between states occurred.....


And since the Drones are on their way to Uz do not discount the need of even Uz for at least anti-model aircraft guns...........

Wondering if a full auto BB gun would work well............

AIUI full auto BB is legal...........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drozd_BB_rifle

May need to consider buying one..........

Before Barry 'Bama Bans it.......

Note: This post brought to you by the letters, S & L

[Doc]

One has to wonder what would have happened if the Libyan people had weapons to overthrow Gaddafi or the Syrian resistance had guns to over throw Assad. Oh well I guess we will never know !!

What happened is right wingers suddenly became very concerned about exactly who had access to weapons. As if not everyone should be trusted with military grade weapons like SAMs. Strange idea.

Except the rebels used their non anti-aircraft weapons to obtain anti-aircraft weapons.

[Doc]

One has to wonder what would have happened if the Libyan people had weapons to overthrow Gaddafi or the Syrian resistance had guns to over throw Assad. Oh well I guess we will never know !!

What happened is right wingers suddenly became very concerned about exactly who had access to weapons. As if not everyone should be trusted with military grade weapons like SAMs. Strange idea.

Again th erebel obtained Anti Aircraft weapons with non anti aircraft weapons.

[Doc]

Listening to an economist about war is like listening to a chef about plumbing.

More to the point, The Economist is a don't-rock-the-boat pro-capitalist status quo publication. They aren't interested in all the grubby plebs arming themselves, especially in cases where the plebs aren't market-friendly.

The point of an armed citizenry as a bulwark against tyranny is, simply put, to create more chaos for the tyrant than it is worth. Historic examples in this case do not exist, as there is no model that closely approximates our own. This is the case in virtually every category of arms, violence, crime, and law with which one would choose to compare America.

The Swiss have been playing this game longer than anyone, are armed to the teeth, and use a militia system.

Great example Ibrahim.

[Typhoon]

Listening to an economist about war is like listening to a chef about plumbing.

More to the point, The Economist is a don't-rock-the-boat pro-capitalist status quo publication. They aren't interested in all the grubby plebs arming themselves, especially in cases where the plebs aren't market-friendly.

The point of an armed citizenry as a bulwark against tyranny is, simply put, to create more chaos for the tyrant than it is worth. Historic examples in this case do not exist, as there is no model that closely approximates our own. This is the case in virtually every category of arms, violence, crime, and law with which one would choose to compare America.

The Swiss have been playing this game longer than anyone, are armed to the teeth, and use a militia system.

Great example Ibrahim.

Yes, of a well-regulated militia.

[monster_gardener]

Listening to an economist about war is like listening to a chef about plumbing.

More to the point, The Economist is a don't-rock-the-boat pro-capitalist status quo publication. They aren't interested in all the grubby plebs arming themselves, especially in cases where the plebs aren't market-friendly.

The point of an armed citizenry as a bulwark against tyranny is, simply put, to create more chaos for the tyrant than it is worth. Historic examples in this case do not exist, as there is no model that closely approximates our own. This is the case in virtually every category of arms, violence, crime, and law with which one would choose to compare America.

The Swiss have been playing this game longer than anyone, are armed to the teeth, and use a militia system.

Great example Ibrahim.

Yes, of a well-regulated militia.

Thank You Very Much for your Post, Typhoon.

Actually maybe locally we Uz Down in the Black Gang ought to start lobbying our State Legislature to go to a Something like a Swiss System.........

Could be as simple as that low crime Georgia Town that requires ALL residents to be armed........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#Gun_law

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1818862/posts

Naturally criminals, the insane, drunks, drug addicts, conscientious objectors and similar could be excluded and assigned to do community service like picking up trash on the roadside in lieu of protecting the community by being armed........

Rather like the idea of a State so well armed that it slows down criminals and politicians for fear of becoming as Holey as Swiss Cheese........

[YMix]

Rather like the idea of a State so well armed that it slows down criminals and politicians for fear of becoming as Holey as Swiss Cheese........

Then you should probably take another look at that Wiki article.

The Swiss army has long been a militia trained and structured to rapidly respond against foreign aggression.

The key words here are "foreign aggression". Not law enforcement, not policing the streets, not civil war.

[monster_gardener]

Rather like the idea of a State so well armed that it slows down criminals and politicians for fear of becoming as Holey as Swiss Cheese........

Then you should probably take another look at that Wiki article.

The Swiss army has long been a militia trained and structured to rapidly respond against foreign aggression.

The key words here are "foreign aggression". Not law enforcement, not policing the streets, not civil war.

Thank You VERY Much for your reply, YMix

Remembering Rogaine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minoxidil

Sometimes Side Affects can be good.........

AFAIK... The Swiss are not notorious for have a crime wave.........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Switzerland

And the citzens of Kennesaw Georgia AFAIK are not required to do law enforcement, police the streets*, or do Civil War**........

Just be armed as a "vaccination" against crime and oppression.......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#Gun_law


*policing the streets is what I proposed for the unarmed.... picking up trash etc......

**Not even Civil War Reenactment

[Typhoon]

Rather like the idea of a State so well armed that it slows down criminals and politicians for fear of becoming as Holey as Swiss Cheese........

Then you should probably take another look at that Wiki article.

The Swiss army has long been a militia trained and structured to rapidly respond against foreign aggression.

The key words here are "foreign aggression". Not law enforcement, not policing the streets, not civil war.

Thank You VERY Much for your reply, YMix

Remembering Rogaine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minoxidil

Sometimes Side Affects can be good.........

AFAIK... The Swiss are not notorious for have a crime wave.........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_Switzerland

And the citzens of Kennesaw Georgia AFAIK are not required to do law enforcement, police the streets*, or do Civil War**........

Just be armed as a "vaccination" against crime and oppression.......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia#Gun_law


*policing the streets is what I proposed for the unarmed.... picking up trash etc......

**Not even Civil War Reenactment

You're assuming that there exists a correlation in Switzerland between a well regulated militia and a low crime rate with the militia as the causative factor.

This is unlikely.
Counter-example: guns in Japan are strictly regulated yet the crime rate is among the lowest in the industrialized world: a rough area, so-called, in Japan is safer than the stereotypical US suburb.

While Switzerland is often held up to be the most democratic nation on earth, due to it's canton system and referenda on important issues, the unwritten cultural conventions and social norms are highly constraining.

So much so that Japan looks like a wild and crazy place by comparison.

The elephant in the room in this [US centric] debate is that it is culture that determines how free and safe is any society, not the availability of or restrictions on guns.

[Typhoon]

Rather like the idea of a State so well armed that it slows down criminals and politicians for fear of becoming as Holey as Swiss Cheese........

Then you should probably take another look at that Wiki article.

The Swiss army has long been a militia trained and structured to rapidly respond against foreign aggression.

The key words here are "foreign aggression". Not law enforcement, not policing the streets, not civil war.

Indeed.

[YMix]

And the citzens of Kennesaw Georgia AFAIK are not required to do law enforcement, police the streets*, or do Civil War**........

Just be armed as a "vaccination" against crime and oppression.......

Some countries may need that and some countries may not. I'm beginning to think that Endovelico is wrong in saying that US citizens should be disarmed. You'd probably kill each other with knives and bats.

[Skin Job]

And the citzens of Kennesaw Georgia AFAIK are not required to do law enforcement, police the streets*, or do Civil War**........

Just be armed as a "vaccination" against crime and oppression.......

Some countries may need that and some countries may not. I'm beginning to think that Endovelico is wrong in saying that US citizens should be disarmed. You'd probably kill each other with knives and bats.

In the absence of foreign invaders, one must find a way to keep in practice.

[Mr. Perfect]

All these spree shootings happened in gun free zones, not one in a police station or a shooting range.

Any ideas on why?

[Mr. Perfect]

And the citzens of Kennesaw Georgia AFAIK are not required to do law enforcement, police the streets*, or do Civil War**........

Just be armed as a "vaccination" against crime and oppression.......

Some countries may need that and some countries may not. I'm beginning to think that Endovelico is wrong in saying that US citizens should be disarmed. You'd probably kill each other with knives and bats.

We already kill each other with knives and bats, just like in countries who already ban guns. Our non-gun murder numbers are worse than many nations total murder numbers (including guns; most nations with gun bans still have gun murders).

Ymix, how do you think murders are committed in Romania?

There is a tremendous amount of ignorance on this issue.

[YMix]

We already kill each other with knives and bats, just like in countries who already ban guns. Our non-gun murder numbers are worse than most nations total murder numbers (including guns; most nations with gun bans still have gun murders).

So the gun is the murder weapon of choice in your country. Congratulations. Also, provide some figures.

[Mr. Perfect]

Already did. But sort of on topic, how do murders get committed in Romania?

[YMix]

Already did. But sort of on topic, how do murders get committed in Romania?

Why beat the dead horse? My remark above meant: "the violent death rates would probably remain the same despite the lack of guns".