Trumps dreams of dictatorship

[stokes]

I would heartily disagree with wit equal footing part.

I didnt mean to say they were equals, but there was far more equity in weaponry then compared to todays situation. Both had muskets, both had cannons.Yes, the British had more but today citizens have rifles and sidearms while the other side has missiles, tanks and doesnt have to set out 3 months before they plan to attack or defend. Look, I dont disagree with your sentiment, I just dont think you can compare the disparity in the 1700's to the disparity that exists between the military and any citizens group that could be assembled today. I'm afraid the only way to reverse what the Dems have done is for the DOJ, FBI and all the rest of them suddenly reverse course and do their jobs when all the evidence is exposed. And we all know thats a long shot.

 

[Xae289]

How do you explain our victory in the Revolutionary War to begin with then? The British Empire was the most powerful, best equipped, best trained and motivated political and military force the world had every known.
I think it would be successful if we had the balls to do it honestly. We had martial superiority in Veitnam, Iraq and Afghanistan yet look how much trouble we have had. Large , centralized organizations are at a disadvantage in asymmetric warfare.

People also tend to forget the contributions of the French, Spanish, and the Dutch.

The American patriots fought well, but the French entered into an alliance with the Americans and declared war on Britain in 1778. Their navy was a massive boon to the Americans, and the small army the French sent to fight with the Americans was nothing to sneeze at. The French came to the Americans' aid back when their army was a feared force with no reputation for "only dropping their rifle once". Hell, the French crown basically bankrupted itself supporting the American war effort.

The Spanish allied with the French and declared war on Britain in 1779. They were definitely in decline by then, but were still a formidable enough force that they managed to win back Florida and Menorca from the British. They weren't directly allied with the Americans, but provided financial and material support to the Americans. Even if they didn't stand shoulder-to-shoulder with them on the battlefield, the Spanish drew a lot of British resources in the Americas away from the patriots.

The Dutch Republic had been trading with the Americans for almost the whole war and provided substantial financing. They went to war with Britain in 1780. They got their asses handed to them, but it still took British resources that couldn't be directed to the Americas.

That's three major powers of the time that joined the war against the British and provided varying degrees of direct support to the Americans.

Even in our own guerrilla nightmares, Vietnam was supported by the USSR and China. Iraq and Afghanistan were supported by various Arab states, Iran, China, and probably Russia.

 

[Podmonkey]

I didnt mean to say they were equals, but there was far more equity in weaponry then compared to todays situation. Both had muskets, both had cannons.Yes, the British had more but today citizens have rifles and sidearms while the other side has missiles, tanks and doesnt have to set out 3 months before they plan to attack or defend. Look, I dont disagree with your sentiment, I just dont think you can compare the disparity in the 1700's to the disparity that exists between the military and any citizens group that could be assembled today. I'm afraid the only way to reverse what the Dems have done is for the DOJ, FBI and all the rest of them suddenly reverse course and do their jobs when all the evidence is exposed. And we all know thats a long shot.

So...... we just give up? Leave it to fate?
I heard this phrase once, don't know where it's originally from. Sounds like part of a dramatic speech, part of said
"You have to put your body between the gears of the machine".
When standing up to legitimate tyranny you have to be willing to be obliterated. It's why despotic regimes are able to come to be and stay in power, most of us are unwilling to be deleted out of hand like that, but that kind of courage is what's necessary to prevail against evil. How do we find that kind of courage?
It strikes me as how back in the days of Napoleonic warfare men were able to summon up the bravery to march in a column against a defensive line of soldiers all shooting at you, knowing that the tactic involved the accepted sacrifice of those in the front ranks would absolutely die in hopes those in the rear ranks would survive long enough to contact and hopefully break the opposing line,
The men in those first ranks knew they would not survive but they marched anyway. How can a man do that? But men DID do it and that is the sort of grim determination to sacrifice that is required to prevail in the face of overwhelming odds. It can be done, it has been done.

Consider the Battle off Samar in the Pacific theater where three destroyers and four destroyer escorts stood between a handful of diminutive esocort carriers and one of the most powerful collections of warships the Japanese had consisting of a multitude of battleships (among their number the largest, most heavily armed and armored battleship in all history the Yamato whose displacement alone was greater than the total combined tonnage of the American force that was Taffy 3) heavy cruisers and numerous fleet destroyers.
Those 7 small warships went toe to toe with Japanese, closed to point blank range, got shot the pieces, blown up and sunk yet saw the Japanese fleet off, saving the landing ships from annihilation.
Taffy 3 was hopelessly outmatched but they won.
It doesn't matter how badly outmatched you are, if you want it bad enough and your cause is just you can prevail.

I belive that the best remedy for our current troubles yet lay in the political realm, with grass roots movements as our best recourse. However if that fails and a peaceful divorce is not forthcoming a revolution is necessary to set things to where they must be.
The Great Experiment our forefathers enacted those many years ago must not come to ruin.

 

[Podmonkey]

People also tend to forget the contributions of the French, Spanish, and the Dutch.

The American patriots fought well, but the French entered into an alliance with the Americans and declared war on Britain in 1778. Their navy was a massive boon to the Americans, and the small army the French sent to fight with the Americans was nothing to sneeze at. The French came to the Americans' aid back when their army was a feared force with no reputation for "only dropping their rifle once". Hell, the French crown basically bankrupted itself supporting the American war effort.

The Spanish allied with the French and declared war on Britain in 1779. They were definitely in decline by then, but were still a formidable enough force that they managed to win back Florida and Menorca from the British. They weren't directly allied with the Americans, but provided financial and material support to the Americans. Even if they didn't stand shoulder-to-shoulder with them on the battlefield, the Spanish drew a lot of British resources in the Americas away from the patriots.

The Dutch Republic had been trading with the Americans for almost the whole war and provided substantial financing. They went to war with Britain in 1780. They got their asses handed to them, but it still took British resources that couldn't be directed to the Americas.

That's three major powers of the time that joined the war against the British and provided varying degrees of direct support to the Americans.

Even in our own guerrilla nightmares, Vietnam was supported by the USSR and China. Iraq and Afghanistan were supported by various Arab states, Iran, China, and probably Russia.

Do you suggest that we would stand alone against the world?
Certainly foreign powers would lend aid to one side or another f9r there own benefit . China would likely lend whatever side, changing sides, simply to prolong the conflict, as would others. With savvy that could be used to an advantage. An American Civil War could become a global one.

 

[Podmonkey]

This is all talk ultimately. What is fact is our election process has become subverted. Whether or not a particular individual believes that is irrelevant, enough people do to sow dissection. In addition it can be objectively proved that the government is inducing corporate media in all levels and segments to suppress information it finds unfavorable and promote information that supports their agenda.
Even worse the relationship between the two is largely symbiotic, the mainstream network news and legacy social med8a outlets are eager to collude with the government's designs and the establishment propers under this media aegis.
This is all readily apparent to anyone willing to objectively look.
The simple truth is the left is bringing conflict to us, whether we want it or not.
Look at what Hochul is doing with so-called hate speech in social media. The left gets to decide what is accepted speech and what is not. The implications are clear, the path ahead is clear. I5s already happening. Cancel culture is be8ng used to de-person anyone guilty of thought crime. It doesn't stop there, we already see the next step as is happening in Australia, those not towing the line are sent to literal concentration camps under the laughably thin guise of COVID quarantines. There is no reason to believe it won't happen here, we have already interred American citizens in concentration camps for nothing more than supposed concerns of national security during WW2.

This fight is coming to us like an on rushing freight train and we are standing dumbfounded in the tracks.
If we don't want this fight we need to start running for l9cal office, city councils, mayor's, schoolboardscand the like, or will are getting run over.
So as was asked before, what will we do?
We hope for best, for the best and fight the good, grassroots political fight.
Failing that we make like the 2,100 ton USS Johnston charging headlong at the 71,000 ton IJN Yamato.

 

[meketrefe]

I think the constitution is quite clear that it is solely the states responsibility.

The feds have no business interfering at all.

The constitution's remedy for what has happened is to eliminate all the federal agencies that aren’t sanctioned by it, and to prosecute everyone involved.

Not only does the constitution prohibit the federal government from interfering in elections, it doesn't even allow them to have the capacity to do so.

If the federal government was limited to the scope the constitution intended, the it wouldn't matter how corrupt they were, they wouldn't have the power to cause problems.

That is why I think all departments in the administrative branch should be apolitical including the presidents position that should be purely administrative, with very limited executive powers yet full right to veto. The president should be elected by both parties and have administrative experience with legislators not being eligible.
....or maybe outsource the administrative branch to a japanese or Norwegian team, .... you know, accountable & responsible people.

If we asked some of those countries to do a. audit on US elections and guarantee no prejudices, then we would find out how many irregularities and frauds were committed perhaps worse than some banana republics we often criticize.

For example, a Swiss organization could do a thorough and impartial audit but why do you think nobody has asked yet?

...so disturbing.

 

[Acer-m14]

Fifth: anyone---- ANYONE caught cheating, is mandatory 10 yrs in jail and a $500,000 fine.

nope .. put in a DIY rocket and shot off the planet

 

[Grimscale]

Trump isn't suggesting that we should abandon the constitution.

He is saying that we already have, and maybe suggesting we should restore it to it's rightful place as a governing document.

I'm not going to wade through this obvious TDS-inspired thread.
What spat said is what I see.
Trump is not calling to suspend the Constitution. The only people who see this are those with TDS or weak-willed mealy-mouths who believe everything CNN spews.
Trump is saying the Constitution was already suspended when fraud was accepted in place of a legit election.

I'll go so far as to say that instead of just installing Trump as President, we have an emergency election overseen by We The People, utilizing actual paper ballots (no electronic machines!). And, most importantly, any evidence of fraud or illegal behavior be investigated, publicly.
This hidden, "you're not allowed to ask about that" bullshit has GOT to stop. If we can't investigate it, it is automatically fraud.

 

[DoOver]

 

[JaguarJaguarGolf]

The unexplained malfunction of errant missiles falling on NYC and Albany would be hilarious. Oopsy

This is why I advocate for private ownership of military grade hardware. Difficult to oppresss the citizenry when the neighborhood watch has an M1 Abrams and a Patriot missile system at their disposal. I am completely serious about that too. I believe in the formation of community militias to which the latest military weapons and tech are dispersed. Then we abolish the department of homeland defense. Such is the duty of every American citizen after all.
I volunteer my experience with the M270 MLRS............ though it would have to be one HELL of a disturbance to need one of those.

Just don’t let Alec Baldwin gets his hands on any weapons

 

[Podmonkey]

Just don’t let Alec Baldwin gets his hands on any weapons

I'd have him and every other Hollywood denizen hung alive by their toes and left to rot on the rope.

 

[Jmac00]

So...... we just give up? Leave it to fate?
I heard this phrase once, don't know where it's originally from. Sounds like part of a dramatic speech, part of said
"You have to put your body between the gears of the machine".
When standing up to legitimate tyranny you have to be willing to be obliterated. It's why despotic regimes are able to come to be and stay in power, most of us are unwilling to be deleted out of hand like that, but that kind of courage is what's necessary to prevail against evil. How do we find that kind of courage?
It strikes me as how back in the days of Napoleonic warfare men were able to summon up the bravery to march in a column against a defensive line of soldiers all shooting at you, knowing that the tactic involved the accepted sacrifice of those in the front ranks would absolutely die in hopes those in the rear ranks would survive long enough to contact and hopefully break the opposing line,
The men in those first ranks knew they would not survive but they marched anyway. How can a man do that? But men DID do it and that is the sort of grim determination to sacrifice that is required to prevail in the face of overwhelming odds. It can be done, it has been done.

Consider the Battle off Samar in the Pacific theater where three destroyers and four destroyer escorts stood between a handful of diminutive esocort carriers and one of the most powerful collections of warships the Japanese had consisting of a multitude of battleships (among their number the largest, most heavily armed and armored battleship in all history the Yamato whose displacement alone was greater than the total combined tonnage of the American force that was Taffy 3) heavy cruisers and numerous fleet destroyers.
Those 7 small warships went toe to toe with Japanese, closed to point blank range, got shot the pieces, blown up and sunk yet saw the Japanese fleet off, saving the landing ships from annihilation.
Taffy 3 was hopelessly outmatched but they won.
It doesn't matter how badly outmatched you are, if you want it bad enough and your cause is just you can prevail.

I belive that the best remedy for our current troubles yet lay in the political realm, with grass roots movements as our best recourse. However if that fails and a peaceful divorce is not forthcoming a revolution is necessary to set things to where they must be.
The Great Experiment our forefathers enacted those many years ago must not come to ruin.

you become the Honey Badger, and say "fuckit, I don't give a flying fuck how big or tough you think you are, Im going rip you a new one, you may win in the end, but it will cost you"

 

[spat]

nope .. put in a DIY rocket and shot off the planet

That's expensive.

The old school method of dropping them into an active volcano is much cheaper.

 

[SomeSoldier]

This is why I advocate for private ownership of military grade hardware. Difficult to oppresss the citizenry when the neighborhood watch has an M1 Abrams and a Patriot missile system at their disposal. I am completely serious about that too. I believe in the formation of community militias to which the latest military weapons and tech are dispersed. Then we abolish the department of homeland defense. Such is the duty of every American citizen after all.
I volunteer my experience with the M270 MLRS............ though it would have to be one HELL of a disturbance to need one of those.

I can run an Abrams.

 

[SomeSoldier]

Not difficult at all when they have multiple M1's and such. Do you guys really think any armed uprising in this country wont be crushed instantly by the military?

Can we be as clever as ISIS and Afganis when they fought us and Russia.

 

[spat]

Not difficult at all when they have multiple M1's and such. Do you guys really think any armed uprising in this country wont be crushed instantly by the military?

How do you envision that working ?

They going to carpet bomb Chicago ?

Roll tanks down main street in Rochester ?

If they do that, then we win.

90% of the people will agree with us that the government *has* become tyrannical and needs to go.

The tighter they squeeze, the worse their position gets.

The goal of the insurancy is not to effect a military defeat. The goal is to wake up more and more people to the tyranny.

The more militant the government gets the better.

The goal is to *force* them to be brutal.

 

[SomeSoldier]

Indeed. Mail in ballots are the bulk of the problem here. That has to be shit canned 8f we are to move forward.
Corporate censorship, at the behest of the government is another major issue.

Hmmnnn, what was the system called again? The one in which private corporations were in collusion with the central government............... oh that's right it's the textbook definition of Facism, how silly of us to forget that.

I disagree. I look at this like any bully. If you don't punch the bully in the face they will continue to harass and undermine you.

 

[tirwin1]

Not difficult at all when they have multiple M1's and such. Do you guys really think any armed uprising in this country wont be crushed instantly by the military?

I am astonished anyone can have this attitude after our experience in Afghanistan. We lost to a determined band of goat fuckers. To spat's point, the day the m-1 tanks roll down US streets is the day the 200 million privately owned guns come into play.

 

[stokes]

Can we be as clever as ISIS and Afganis when they fought us and Russia.

ISIS had the Russians arming them. The US armed the Afghani's. Under Obuma we didnt fight ISIS, he let them expand. Trump defeated ISIS. Look, I aint saying it shouldnt and wont come to the people taking things back. I just dont think it'll be successful. I think the only chance would be if the Military refused to confront American citizens.

We lost to a determined band of goat fuckers.

We didnt lose to a band of goat fuckers, we beat them and then Brandon capitulated and gave it back to the Taliban. Didnt take long for China to quietly move in after we were gone. Another Biden/China deal?

 

[FP1201]

Indeed. Mail in ballots are the bulk of the problem here. That has to be shit canned 8f we are to move forward.
Corporate censorship, at the behest of the government is another major issue.

Hmmnnn, what was the system called again? The one in which private corporations were in collusion with the central government............... oh that's right it's the textbook definition of Facism, how silly of us to forget that.

The ironic part is the Leftist, "antifa" and socialists that so vehemently proclaimed opposition were the very ones accusing Trump while blasting it out on Twatter, fecesbook, and the other social media platforms.

 

[spat]

ISIS had the Russians arming them. The US armed the Afghani's. Under Obuma we didnt fight ISIS, he let them expand. Trump defeated ISIS. Look, I aint saying it shouldnt and wont come to the people taking things back. I just dont think it'll be successful. I think the only chance would be if the Military refused to confront American citizens.

We didnt lose to a band of goat fuckers, we beat them and then Brandon capitulated and gave it back to the Taliban. Didnt take long for China to quietly move in after we were gone. Another Biden/China deal?

The fight was over who would control Afghanistan.

Who is in control of Afghanistan today ?

We lost.

Just like Vietnam, we didn't lose militarily, but we lost.

Just like we could curb stomp China militarily, but they are beating us like a rented mule right now by infiltration and economic warfare.

Your argument is like taking a football game and saying "yes, but we rushed and passed for twice as many yards as they had". Sure, that's all well and good, but all that matters at the end is touchdowns.

 

[stokes]

Ok, you win. We got 2 more years to ramble on about Trump etc before the election, its gonna get crazy around here. We've gotten way off topic here, if you guys think the citizens can stand against the military, I'll be there.....but we're all gonna die.
Back on the original topic, I saw a snippet somewhere that Trump is hosting another dinner at Mar a Lago with "questionable" guests like the Kanye West thing. Gonna go see what thats about, if anything. Probably just a case of the assholes picking apart everything he does these days.

 

[stokes]

Nothing to that story. He had some broad they are claiming is a "conspiracy theorist", Liz Crokin or some such. Got more faith in what ever they call conspiracy theory than anything they have to say these days.

 

[ArmedCorgi]

I am astonished anyone can have this attitude after our experience in Afghanistan. We lost to a determined band of goat fuckers. To spat's point, the day the m-1 tanks roll down US streets is the day the 200 million privately owned guns come into play.

For real. People also seem to forget that this is a BIG country. We had a hard enough time controlling an area not much larger than a few states.

It would be very hard if not impossible, even for our military, to maintain control over a country the size of ours. The military simply isn't big enough. They might be able to get a lock down on major cities, but not the rural areas or all that "fly over country". Our population is armed. Something like 12 million armed Americans (just hunters).

There is no professional army that size. Even considering that 12million would mostly consist of old, out of shape, no military experience, Etc., Etc. People, there would still be more capable armed citizens than any standing army. You think about all the scary vulnerabilities in our infrastructure that have been talked about here on this forum and others.
Not to mention the likelyhood that the US military would fracture along loyalty lines.
It wouldn't likely be a steamroller victory of the US military over armed citizens. It would likely be a very protracted, bloody, hot mess.

 

[spat]

Ok, you win. We got 2 more years to ramble on about Trump etc before the election, its gonna get crazy around here. We've gotten way off topic here, if you guys think the citizens can stand against the military, I'll be there.....but we're all gonna die.
Back on the original topic, I saw a snippet somewhere that Trump is hosting another dinner at Mar a Lago with "questionable" guests like the Kanye West thing. Gonna go see what thats about, if anything. Probably just a case of the assholes picking apart everything he does these days.

The citizens can't stand against the military.

That's not the point. If you think that's how you should fight that war you are missing the point entirely.

You don't fight the military at all if you can avoid it.

The military are not the enemy. It's the government that is the enemy if it becomes tyrannical. You fight them and avoid the military as best as possible.

And that works.

You start off with 3 or 4% of the populace willing to fight. Then the government is forced to crack down, and then it's 5 or 10%. Then they have to crack down harder and now it's 20%.

Eventually they have to crack down hard enough that they lose too much popular support to hold power, even with draconian measures and blatant cheating.

That is how you win an insurrection, not by fighting against tanks and planes.

 

[Grimscale]

Not to mention the likelyhood that the US military would fracture along loyalty lines.

I think this should be mentioned. Quite loudly, and in the ears of potential tyrants.

The military is all volunteer-based. People who have families. People who, for now, firmly believed in the Constitution and the ideas it protected.

People who would not accept being ordered to point their guns at their own families and friends.

And when they leave that military, knowing that the officers would try to order the next person to do what they rejected, they will likely bring a lot of that equipment with them.

 

[beebee]

yeah, wrong.. Throughout the entirety of human history, right up to today, military personnel have been ordered to and complied when told to harass,round up, imprison, torture, murder or brutally massacre their fellow countrymen..

" I was simply doing my duty"... "Just following orders".. "I followed my commanders instructions".

The US military can and will kill unarmed civilians if ordered to , just as every military throughout the history of the world has done.. Yes they do have loved ones, and thats the main reason they WILL follow any order no matter how tyrannical and brutal it is.. They want to go home to them, and know they won't if they disobey orders.. Same with any police force anywhere.. They always have, always will oppress or kill their fellow citizens when ordered to do so.. Anyone in the modern age that seriously thinks the military or police will side with the citizenry in a SHTF scenario is deluded..
I will accept the notion that there will be some "conscientious objectors" that will refuse to follow tyrannical orders, but they will quickly be made examples of, and the vast majority will fall in line in short order...
Please do not pin your hopes on any government entity coming to your aid in real SHTF situation..

 

[Acer-m14]

The US military can and will kill unarmed civilians if ordered to

can you name any US Civilians the US military killed with the Current Military .. (so you cant use wounded knee as a example )

 

[beebee]

Victims​

Memorial to Jeffrey Miller, taken from approximately the same perspective as John Filo's 1970 photograph, as it appeared in 2007.

Killed (and approximate distance from the National Guard):

• Jeffrey Glenn Miller; 265 ft (81 m) shot through the mouth; killed instantly.
• Allison B. Krause; 343 ft (105 m) fatal left chest wound; dead on arrival.
• William Knox Schroeder; 382 ft (116 m) fatal chest wound; died almost an hour later in a local hospital while undergoing surgery. He was a member of the campus ROTC battalion.
• Sandra Lee Scheuer; 390 ft (120 m) fatal neck wound; died a few minutes later from loss of blood.

Wounded (and approximate distance from the National Guard):

• Joseph Lewis, Jr.; 71 ft (22 m); hit twice; once in his right abdomen and once in his lower left leg.
• John R. Cleary; 110 ft (34 m); upper left chest wound.
• Thomas Mark Grace; 225 ft (69 m); hit in his left ankle.
• Alan Michael Canfora; 225 ft (69 m); hit in his right wrist.[49]
• Dean R. Kahler; 300 ft (91 m); back wound fracturing the vertebrae; permanently paralyzed from the chest down.
• Douglas Alan Wrentmore; 329 ft (100 m); hit in his right knee.
• James Dennis Russell; 375 ft (114 m); hit in his right thigh from a bullet and grazed on his right forehead by either a bullet or birdshot; both wounds minor (wounded near the Memorial Gymnasium, away from most of the other students).
• Robert Follis Stamps; 495 ft (151 m); hit in his right buttock.
• Donald Scott MacKenzie; 750 ft (230 m); neck wound.

Of those shot, none was closer than 71 feet (22 m) to the guardsmen. Of those killed, the nearest (Miller) was 265 feet (81 m) away, and their average distance from the guardsmen was 345 feet (105 m). The victim furthest from the Guard was 750 feet (230 m) away.[50]

also do a little research on Ruby Ridge, and all the unwarranted killings of unarmed people by cops the last several years.. Government agencies are not your friend. They listen to their superiors ,NOT their fellow citizens...

I didn't say its an ever day occurrence.. Its not of course... However if you REALLY think that any government entity will not kill civilians if told to by superiors, you are really naive'....bob

 

[spat]

Victims​

Memorial to Jeffrey Miller, taken from approximately the same perspective as John Filo's 1970 photograph, as it appeared in 2007.

Killed (and approximate distance from the National Guard):

• Jeffrey Glenn Miller; 265 ft (81 m) shot through the mouth; killed instantly.
• Allison B. Krause; 343 ft (105 m) fatal left chest wound; dead on arrival.
• William Knox Schroeder; 382 ft (116 m) fatal chest wound; died almost an hour later in a local hospital while undergoing surgery. He was a member of the campus ROTC battalion.
• Sandra Lee Scheuer; 390 ft (120 m) fatal neck wound; died a few minutes later from loss of blood.

Wounded (and approximate distance from the National Guard):

• Joseph Lewis, Jr.; 71 ft (22 m); hit twice; once in his right abdomen and once in his lower left leg.
• John R. Cleary; 110 ft (34 m); upper left chest wound.
• Thomas Mark Grace; 225 ft (69 m); hit in his left ankle.
• Alan Michael Canfora; 225 ft (69 m); hit in his right wrist.[49]
• Dean R. Kahler; 300 ft (91 m); back wound fracturing the vertebrae; permanently paralyzed from the chest down.
• Douglas Alan Wrentmore; 329 ft (100 m); hit in his right knee.
• James Dennis Russell; 375 ft (114 m); hit in his right thigh from a bullet and grazed on his right forehead by either a bullet or birdshot; both wounds minor (wounded near the Memorial Gymnasium, away from most of the other students).
• Robert Follis Stamps; 495 ft (151 m); hit in his right buttock.
• Donald Scott MacKenzie; 750 ft (230 m); neck wound.

Of those shot, none was closer than 71 feet (22 m) to the guardsmen. Of those killed, the nearest (Miller) was 265 feet (81 m) away, and their average distance from the guardsmen was 345 feet (105 m). The victim furthest from the Guard was 750 feet (230 m) away.[50]

also do a little research on Ruby Ridge, and all the unwarranted killings of unarmed people by cops the last several years.. Government agencies are not your friend. They listen to their superiors ,NOT their fellow citizens...

I didn't say its an ever day occurrence.. Its not of course... However if you REALLY think that any government entity will not kill civilians if told to by superiors, you are really naive'....bob

The government will always be able to find people to fill the uniforms who will follow any order they receive.

But that isn't to say they all will.

The NAZIs started out just murdering people as they were found.

But that turned out to be a problem, because the average soldier would not be able to continue doing that.

That's the whole reason the camps were developed. You can't get an average soldier to shoot innocent women and children in the back of the head day in and day out.

But you can get average soldiers to load innocent people on to cattle cars and ship them off where you have a few psychopathic soldiers who will happily murder then industrially.

Just like if you had to slaughter your own livestock there'd be a lot more vegetarians out there today.


They have things far more compartmentalized today.

Many of the cops who would refuse a general order to confiscate guns have left, the ones who haven't are just trying to stick around a few more years to lock in a pension.

The rest will happily say "some guy in a black robe said it's OK. It's not my place to question. You can't have everybody deciding what laws they will enforce it would be anarchy.

And they don't even *need* a majority to do it.

They just need to find a dozen guys who would murder their own mother if ordered and send them. Then when someone resists, all the "good cops" will absolutely drop what they're doing to help because "shots fired".