Why do civilians think they can over throw the government?

[blissinanarchy1]

Mostly conservatives, because they’re more into the guns. You can have a 5.56 Semi - auto rifle, with a bump stock, Beta C Drum mags, any accessories you want, whether it be scopes, lasers, whatever…. AR plated vests…. and the military will still take you out like nothing.

Fun fact that’ll piss them off: The second amendment calls for the right to bare arms. Yes, this applies to civilian use of weapons. A well regulated malitia doesn’t refer to civilians with advanced weaponry. Refers to the National Guard, because the malitia is for defense against invading foreigners, not our own government. There are US Federal Statutes to cut off trade and supply to that state.

[Anonymous]

For the record, NOBODY is realistically talking about overthrowing a government here. What they're doing is keeping a corrupt government in check.

Remember Biden trying to send his foot soldiers door to door to "persuade" people to get the vaccine?

Remember the "concentration camps" Biden built in America just like the ones built in Australia to "house" people suspected of having the covid?

Remember the Oregon Senators who fled the state, rather than being forced to pass an illegal tax hike on their people? And were protected by armed CITIZENS WITH THEIR GUNS?

All of those things were arguably prevented because of an armed population of civilians. :) The last one was directly, and because they were protected, the corrupt Oregon politicians agreed to drop the illegal tax increase.

Remember Operation Jade Helm, where then, President Obama ran nation-wide military drills including members of NATO and shit on American soil, while their "military games" coincidentally" used labels of "enemy territory" on conservative states? The government of Texas, along with its National Guard AND armed civilians stood watch, to ensure that it wasn't an actual hostile takeover by a corrupt government. :)

Judging by the shit Biden TRIED to pull during covid, and the authoritarian actions taken by liberal leaders in countries who have disarmed their populace, I would argue that that was their intentions if they had managed to disarm the American people though.

And our "covid camps" were never used but are documented to exist. But there was an intensely strong fight to try and disarm the people, as well as a loud outcry from covid-zombies to "lock up the dirty unvaccinated Trump supporters". Hmm, I wonder how they were planning to use them if given the chance.

You can say whatever you want. Make any claims you wish, but millions of people saw the same things that I just listed, and saw how differently things went in countries where they have already disarmed the people, and we will continue to believe with strong evidence to back it up, that the civilian population of guns in this country has so far, prevented multiple dictator-esque moves, NONE of which were attempted by Trump, which is fascinating since the left got a hard-on from talking about how "Trump's trying to be a dictator".

Thanks. This was fun though.

[WindAtMyBack]

They think it because it's true.

"A well regulated malitia doesn’t refer to civilians with advanced weaponry. Refers to the National Guard, because the malitia is for defense against invading foreigners, not our own government. "

You have no idea what you are talking about. Look at the history of it and you'll see that it refers to the people and it's about rebellion against the government.

When it comes to war against the government, just look at history there as well, including recent history.

"and the military will still take you out like nothing."

Nope. Not when they don't even know who you are. It's asymmetrical warfare and it can be extremely difficult for traditional uniformed military to fight. We've seen the truth of this over and over again.

There are more Americans with guns that the combined military of the entire world. Just look around you at recent world events when there were only a fraction of that many people fighting against modern military.

[blissinanarchy1]

Your group of people with even high powered small arms won’t compete against weaponry citizens don’t have access to. Tanks, bombers, etc.

[WindAtMyBack]

You missed the point. Tanks and bombers are almost useless.

Just look at what actually happens for real. We've seen it over and over again. Modern military is made to fight other modern military. It doesn't work in the type of war we are talking about.

[blissinanarchy1]

Tanks and bombers are not useless at all. It’s just the difference between training and no training. Even guerillas got training. Can you take a bunch of civilians, put them together, and they are as combat effective as even basic infantry? Even isis, al qaeda, Taliban, they all train consistently, it’s a way of life here. There’s a difference between shooting in the range, vs actual combat.

[WindAtMyBack]

I repeat, look at what happens.

What makes you think nobody has any training? But even without training, they can still vastly outnumber the uniformed military. You don't need any training to walk up behind someone and shoot them in the head. Just remember that the rebels can do that but not the other way around.

The government has two choices. They can maintain the law and due process, or completely throw it away. If they maintain the law they have to identify, catch, gather evidence, put on trial, and prove guilt of every single person, one at a time.

That can't simply go in with tanks, bombers or even infantry and start blowing everyone away, especially when they don't even know who they are.

[blissinanarchy1]

Once you’re identified as a hostile group, you become a lawful combatant and gain combatant privilege. Rules of engagement will then allow you to be fired upon. Yes, a few soldiers will die that way. It’ll be shut down quick though.

[WindAtMyBack]

Identifying is not easy. In the meantime they can be picking off the uniformed military one at a time.

You keep forgetting the part about what really happens and has happened in the past. Even here in the States, why don't they just go in and wipe out the Mafia, the Crips or the Hell's Angels?

[blissinanarchy1]

Because there’s no martial law, and it’s not a time of conflict so they don’t have combatant privilege. Even those identified are afforded due process.

[WindAtMyBack]

How hard was it to identity and take out the enemy in Afghanistan?

I missed this one
"There’s a difference between shooting in the range, vs actual combat."
What about all the people who know the territory and have been hunting since they were 10? Humans are a heck of a lot easier to kill than a deer. A lot of those guys also use bows and crossbows which are silent.

[SaoirseS]

What makes you think any US soldier, sailor, airman, or marine will turn against his or her own citizenry? There are safeguards in place to prevent this sort of thing from happening.
The military follows LAWFUL orders. Soldiers and leaders at all echelons understand the difference between lawful and unlawful orders, and I had more than plenty of legal training and oversight to make sure we understood that.
The notion the military just blindly follows orders is pure nonsense. They are not mindless robots.

[Bratsondanielle]

I have two words for you. Democrats' favorite: January six 🥳🥳🥳🥳

[Stoner710]

Actually the it was designed to take out the federal government if need be, remember the whiskey rebellion https://www.history.com/topics/early-us/whiskey-rebellion

now of course we have more advanced technology guns are still important for defending ourselves against foreign powers and our own government. The founders actually believe that if the government would get tyrannical and the citizens would have to take out the federal government. Also your making the case for Americans having the legal right to own an F15 not against it by your logic. Joe Biden has made the same argument. “You’ll need tanks and f15 to take down the federal government”. Makes the case for Americans having tanks and fighter it’s doesn’t it.
also where do you think the guns went after the regulated Malaysia was done practicing for the day the individual took there guns home. Many Americans owned canons most of the cannons there Americans used in the revolutionary war were privately owned

[blissinanarchy1]

An F15 would realistically never be up for civillian use, training wouldn’t be the same as civilian planes due to weapon systems. Not sure if armed forces would train civilians in use of highly advanced weapons that have the sple intention of defense from themselves. That’s like me handing you a loaded gun and say feel free to shoot me if you disagree with me. Private contractors who flew those planes are likely, but where would you get the airspace and target practice space? Just way too expensive and resource costly to be realistic. And yes, back in the day the militia took home there arms. They were the “army” and “national guard”. They were minute men. They were not as technologically advanced or organized as the modern military, or as heavily populated where they have enough militants to form a non civilian militia (National Guard)

[Stoner710]

Yes practically speaking most civilians wouldn’t be able to get there hand on a fighter jet. (You would have to be musk or bezos or gates to do that). With the advancement of arms in the armed forces means the civilian population needs to have someone of an equal footing. Obviously it’s not try to go to Own and F15 but Biden did make the case for why Americans should be allowed to own them

[VanillaSalt]

If the government shot and killed a black woman with a baby how would people react? If the government took away the right to go to school what would people do? There’s been many MANY civil wars that have lead to a new government… hell the first one for us that MADE America was cause the citizens rebelled against the British. Government couldn’t remain in power if the people turned against them. Even the military’s made up of the people… do you think they would continue to fight if their families were in danger? One man with a gun could kill dozens in power…


People have the real power their just too dumb to understand that. Too divided to come together. Remember what happened when they started pushing their woke bullshit on children? The mothers went insane and democrats lost the support that gave them the presidency.


Also liberals like guns too only the left don’t like guns. You shouldn’t talk like you understand the constitution. You obviously do not.

[lightbulb27]

Sounds rational. Some people are extreme... most are not. They don't trust hte govt so start using force. I seem to recall some group called Antifa and BLM to some extent that although didn't overthrow feds, tried to take over a city and ended up killing people nation wide. Extremists are that... extreme.

Maybe, but when one checks history of social discord like... the Indonesian massacre of 1960's, Hutu /Tutsi, Chairman Mao's purge, Khmer Rouge., and most recently the Afghanistan takeover... etc... having a defense against crazy people is a good idea. So balance against power is that...

[TotallyAlmost]

No state can win when there is an armed popular uprising. The force of numbers is overwhelming. In a war of attrition, the state always capitulates. History has shown this time and time again. The Constitution makes no stipulation as to the definition of "militia." Further, the founders considered the right to bear arms and to self defense as natural rights bestowed by God. Pretty damn important, hence it's second only to the right to free expression. They knew an armed population was vital to prevent enslavement by the State.

[Anonymous]

The government was beaten by rice farmers in Vietnam and nomadic extremists in Afghanistan. They can fight an opposing military, but non-conventional warfare is their weakness. They have to turn into a peacekeeping force and stand around protecting infrastructure or risk an attack on food, energy or power and losing control of the whole population.
I always find it odd when people laugh and say they’ll just bomb people in their own homes. I ask them how well they know their own neighbors and how well they’d fair if the government blew their neighbors house up.
Would you support a tyrannical government that would sacrifice you and your family?

[USLegionary]

In Vietnam all those rice farmers were basically wiped out by 1968. In Afghanistan the Taliban left Afghanistan until the US pulled out
There's nowhere insurgents can hide. Fire a shot at a US soldier results in your location being pinpointed and a cannon shell being fired at you. They don't have to bomb your home, they can pick you off with a 50 cal crows platform that can be mounted to almost any military vechile. It can fire a single shot or full auto as accurate as any sniper rifle, it can target at long range, has night and thermal vision and has motion sensors. Then you UAVs above with the same visual equipment.

[ChrisMaster69]

Who needs guns to overthrow a government.

a mass walkout of people would cripple any economy.

pick either side and have 90% of people who voted for that party not work for a month.

Make it 3 months.

with mass peaceful marches along various routes.

[TwoToTooTutu2]

Because it has happened before a million times. And what the fuck is a Nuclear Aircraft Carrier going to do against 5 redneck rebels in Nebraska? Nothing. 90% of the US military would be worthless. Only anti infantry weapons can be used against an army of only infantry. What are gen 5 interceptors going to do? Prevent hillbillies from performing strategic air raids on industrial infrastructure?

[blissinanarchy1]

Wrong. Rules of engagement do not restrict the use of vehicular weapons against infantry. Only 50 BMG rounds.

[TwoToTooTutu2]

They're worthless weapons against infantry. Air to air interceptors are not useful against infantry. Never have been never will

[blissinanarchy1]

M1 Abrams, anti personnel armored vehicles. (Not APCs, that’s a carrier). I believe they’re called Bradley Fighting Vehicles. Anything with a.50 BMG HMG on it. You can’t exactly get an accurate shot with that thing supressing you. It can take your head off by shooting NEAR you, not even making impact, and the US does that all the time. Look at the civilians in Ukraine. I support there effort, but without training they drop like flies. A group of civvies tried to assault a tank with a molotov. What do you think was the outcome?

[brandisimo96]

Pretty sure this guy is just trolling 😂 But what the heck, I'll bite.

The very fact that the Left is trying so hard to take away the guns of Americans speaks for itself. They fear what they can't control, and citizens with arms is at the top of that list. The second amendment was implemented by the founding fathers for the very purpose of checks and balances.

[blissinanarchy1]

I’m more of a center left because I do like guns, and honestly AR15s don’t bother me, but I do lean more towards social justice causes. The left fears mass shootings, which is pretty justifiable.

[brandisimo96]

They give the appearance of fearing mass shootings, but in actuality they fear any person who owns a firearm they can't control. Mass shootings are horrible, absolutely! But the Left politicizes them for the sake of pushing an agenda. For instance, that school shooting in Texas a few months ago. The mayor of the town didn't say much in regards to the horrible event that happened, but instead used it as an opportunity to talk about getting rid of guns. Not exactly subtle

[blissinanarchy1]

Certain armed citizens can prevent and defend against crime, more often than not, they don’t, which I’m sorry to say. I’m all for concealed carry, but open carry is highly irresponsible and honestly not smart. In Philly. you can’t even have a legal gun in public. Too many thought open carry is a deterent to crime, only to be shot in the back of the head or snuck up on with no possibility of responding fast enough, and it’s reality. At least with concealed carry, you’re no longer the primary threat and can respond.

[USLegionary]

I think the possibility of a non federal militia fighting of a tyrannical US military is now passed. It would just be a slaughter.

[blissinanarchy1]

Exactly. The military would absolutely demolish the civilian population.

[Shamalien]

And you call yourself an anarchist…you don’t know the meaning of the word. You don’t know shit about why the founding fathers created the second amendment. It IS for defence against All threats, both foreign AND DOMESTIC you thick fuck

[blissinanarchy1]

Old account. I identify more as a center left. Put do provide the source.

[Shamalien]

Center my ass lol

[blissinanarchy1]

Is that a request? I mean you seem like the type of guy to want something in the center of your ass

[ManHater]

Where Democrats who love big nany states would love to turn you into socialists idiots who can't take care of them selves. This is why people like you can't take care of your self, you want the government to do it.

[blissinanarchy1]

Can’t take care of myself. Hilarious. Definetely got myself out of one the poorest inner city neighborhoods in the east coat into a upper middle class suburb without government assistance.

[ManHater]

Tell that to the rest of American's in poverty.

[blissinanarchy1]

And…. then what?

[NaultD]

Betting on military joining them. Really goes to the mental bandwidth they are working with.

[blissinanarchy1]

Military isn’t an entire like minded entity. It’d be split.

[USLegionary]

The National Guards, state and local enforcement agencies would likely go with whatever state they are in.

[blissinanarchy1]

@USLegionary As civilians. Whoever is charge of them would have them tried for treason.

[jahaims]

Did the world's strongest military take out all enemy combatants in a area it occupied for 20 years? Nope. Did the enemy reclaim it's territory as soon as America decided to withdraw due to the cost of a long drawn out war? Yep.

[USLegionary]

Iraq or Afghanistan? Or the Philippines? Hawaii? Western United States? Texas? Arizona? New Mexico?
The Taliban basically waited 20 years knowing one day the US would leave. They had tried to run asymmetrical guerilla warfare on the US but it was largely unsuccessful and costly.
They used the opportunity to train new recruits sending a lot of them to serve in foreign militaries like Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia even in Afghan army trained by the US.
US presence in Afghanistan wasn't really costing that much in terms of resources or money after all the US maintains over 900 foreign military bases globally. But it looked bad politically because 4 US Presidents made election promises that the US would eventually leave and also the Afgan government was corrupt and weak.
It was a similar situation in the Vietnam war, the vietcong were decimated by the time the Tet offensive ended, North Vietnam had to send regualar North Vietnam army battalions South to reinforce them. They to basically waited until the US left to take over.
A good example of a gurelia resistance movement being put down by a tyrannical government is in Russia after WW1, the Black Army was wiped out by the Red Army and to stop them revolting again they starved 1 million Ukrainians and executed anyone who spoke out. The White army and green army were wiped out too. Few dared revolt again in the Soviet Union.

[gorydetails]

You idiots thought an unarmed mob nearly overthrew the US government Jan 6, 2021. And It’s bear arms, not bare arms. What idiot thinks the militia refers to the National Guard?

[blissinanarchy1]

The mob was not unarmed. A cop was killed. One who was arrested with a pistol admitted he wanted to kill peloski.

[gorydetails]

Um. The cop died of a stroke at home.

[blissinanarchy1]

A cop was crushed between the doors.

[gorydetails]

Lmao. You stupid ass.

[HazyDaze63]

It was the act of outspoken citizens that formed this country to begin with.

[Agape93]

They fail to realize this isn't red dawn or some thriller novel.

[WindAtMyBack]

I don't remember Red Dawn in detail. I'm sure there was a lot of fake as hell stuff. But I think the overall idea is how it really will work. It's basic asymmetrical guerilla warfare.

And if I remember the location of that movie right, that is not a part of the country to take lightly.

[Agape93]

It was a bunch of untrained High-school kids taking on 2 or 3 professional militaries

[WindAtMyBack]

Yea, I vaguely remember that. It doesn't change my answer. A bunch of high school kids COULD take on a full army using guerilla tactics. That's especially true if they were from where I think that movie took place.

This is the very reason why guerilla tactics are used in asymmetrical warfare around the world. Because it works and has been shown to work over and over again.

[Agape93]

I don't see it happening. Like, at all. If they really wanted rebels dead, they'll just carpet bomb the areas, burn the fields and taint the water.

[Agape93]

Remove shelter and resources, the enemy will die off.

[WindAtMyBack]

Yes they could carpet bomb, assuming they knew where to bomb. Even a relatively small 10x10 mile area is a tremendous area to bomb, not to mention it's all hills and forest.

But our government isn't going to carpet bomb their own country. Nor are they going to starve their own citizens. The government won't even know who they are or precisely where they are.

This is all theory. We have proof that the type of things done in Red dawn really work, because it's worked over and over again. We KNOW it works. Why do you think the US military was in Afghanistan so long? Why didn't they just go in with all their might and wipe out a few insurgents in a few weeks? It's because it's extremely difficult to do.

[hafinjun]

Red Dawn it wasand Cubans

[hafinjun]

In Red Dawn it was Communist Russia and Cuba that overthrew the United States government well really didn't overthrow it but it took over a good part of the country and while we is calling us held back the British army they were equipped with Apache helicopters and m1 Abrams tanks I have to agree with you, in an all-out war figurines wouldn't stand a chance

[wouterv]

Probely cause of history Books we all know it happend a lot even though the government was stronger do i think its possible in the is not really but that's not my point

[OddBeMe]

Agreed. The best defense is to always make sure our govt is represented by elected officials. Not by presidents who lost by 6 million votes.

[anylolone]

Because all overthrown governments are by civilians.

Because governments need civilians to exist.

[noohair]

These things happen when the voting is suspect.
Every vote was counted, yes.
State election law was violated in several states. Yes.

[Anonymous]

Sharp as a ball of play-doh. 👌

[blissinanarchy1]

Now’s not the time for self reflection 😘 it’s not relevant.

[Opinion Owner]

You really don’t know what you’re talking about, but you’re so certain that you do. You have the kind of confidence children have before they stick a fork into an outlet, but sadly no one handed you a utensil and pointed you in the right direction.

[Anonymous]

They don't.