The Second Amendment is not written for sporting. The Second Amendment is so that if a tyrannical government ever wants to rise up, we can stop them. And if anybody ever wants to say, “Oh, well you know what? Citizens with a few small arms fire would never be able to stop the federal government.”
I absolutely disagree. Ask the Viet Cong how they handled the Marines and the Army in Vietnam.
— North Carolina Rep. Madison Cawthorn
Rep Madison Cawthorn: "If anybody ever wants to say 'oh, well you know what, citizens with a few small arms fire would never be able to stop the federal government' – I absolutely disagree. Ask the Viet Cong how they handled the Marines and the Army in Vietnam" pic.twitter.com/BPqn3d9Rsx
— Jason Campbell (@JasonSCampbell) June 16, 2021
You could also ask the IRA, or the Mujaheddin.
The Mujaheddin were a very rude surprise to the Superman Russian army…
Geoff, the reason the US and Russia could not put an end to things in Vietnam and Russia was the lack of political will to do what was necessary, regardless of world public opinion.
If you want to know how the US would handle a real insurrection, study the Waco atrocity.
Waco was small potatoes.
In a real insurrection, the People will outnumber Federal government forces by at least 10 to 1.
“If you want to know how the US would handle a real insurrection, study the Waco atrocity.”
No doubt, initially.
But when the word gets out…
The Stingers made the difference. More importantly, the way they were deployed. The Muj didn’t get a pile of them dropped at their feet, the only way the CIA would issue a new one was if the empty launcher tube was returned. That policy kept them (for the most part) out of the hands o those who might like to shoot down airliners…
“Geoff, the reason the US and Russia could not put an end to things in Vietnam and Russia was the lack of political will to do what was necessary, regardless of world public opinion.”
Agree wholeheartedly. The campaign our Marines, Navy and Army accomplished in the Pacific during World War 2 was a much more difficult situation than anything attempted in the Middle East, Korean “conflict”, or anywhere since we started negotiating peace rather than earning it at the expense of the enemy. Or imagine embedded, left-wing US “reporters on the ground” in Cologne, Berlin, or Dresden(!) during the allied bombing campaign that brought Hitler down. “OMG! We’re killing civilians!” Well, yeah- they’re the ones allowing the Nazis to go on… How many of the “Palestinians” don’t have any ties to the cretins living in their midst who are raining rockets down on Isreal, or staging terrorism from their ‘hoods?
Peace can happen but one must paint with a bigger brush, and sometimes a roller is even better.
And “peace” need not mean everyone is happy- I doubt many of the Japanese and Germans were too thrilled about having to accept unconditional surrender terms but they got over it and their revived nations flourished, much to the expense of the American people.
Any questions about “political will” should be answered if we ever are forced to go toe-to-toe with China, or Russia on this soil. They won’t give a damn about our woke military leadership, gays with guns in the ranks or female-led, feeling-based diplomacy. From the times of Abraham and before, war was something that cost the loser EVERYTHING. What the “free world” has experienced since 1945 is just an interlude, an anomaly in the face of history.
I hope none of this comes to be during the present Harris/Biden admin.
https://youtu.be/wX3hRj6XoUM
https://youtu.be/0OHH49vtl2g
over 100,000,000 armed Americans.
If 3% is the number we use, that’s 3,000,000 Americans vs. the Police (who join the Red Coats) and the small number of actual combat troops across the military who decide to join the Red Coats.
Why do you think our government wants us disarmed? Because the people who own the politicians KNOW we outnumber them significantly and KNOW that if we get pissed off enough (after the wealth gap continues to increase) they’ll go straight to the gallows.
Always thought it was funny how the left always seemed to support, embrace or even idolize armed rebellions like FARC, the INLA and a whole cadre of various Red Armies throughout Europe and Asia but consistently deride, belittle and work endlessly to “other” small-arms and their owners here at home.
Because here, in the US, THEY are the government that would be the target.
I like to remind officeholders that this would be an insurgency.
The insurgents won’t be going to fight tanks with their rifles. They will be going to your kid’s school with their rifles. They will be right outside your door.
“They will be going to your kid’s school with their rifles.” What does this mean?
They are going to fight unarmed school children instead?
Yup. I’ve witnessed a few insurgencies, and that’s exactly how it goes.
You are the kind of warrior I’d gladly follow into battle….and shoot in the back.
Sick phuk
Cato he gave the reality of the situation. As another who has witnessed insurgencies I agree with his prediction.
Just because we know what happens does not mean we condone or would do the same. It is people who identify as leftists who have used those tactics throughout history.
People that murder children to gain political objectives are terrorists. Those are the people we kill, not become.
Besides being a war crime and a line no civil person should cross, the damage to the cause would be existential. No civil society would ever follow a leader or cause that would use such tactics.
Cato,
It sounds like you might be delusional. It sounds like you have no idea what war is.
Here is the reality, from someone who’s lived it.
War means dead kids. Civil War means dead kids on your doorstep. Civil War means dead kids on your neighbor’s doorstep.
Now, go back and reread what I wrote. Use some basic reading comprehension.
Then you can act like a grown up, and apologize.
Tell me how you’ve lived ‘it’. I find it difficult to believe you have any credibility.
Real warriors would take on the threat, the actual threat that might come from people with weapons that wanted to take freedoms away. While others do that, you can run down to the local elementary school and blast away.
You are a real hero.
If you want to create a real backlash against guns and gun owners, keep talking about murdering children. You are a fool.
I retired from the AF with 2500 flying hours, 450 combat hours during Desert Storm.
Dead kids? Well, our kids are getting their genitals mutilated right now.
Barking up the wrong tree, Cato. JWT is right and he objectively knows more than you (more than any of us, probably) about how this crap really unfolds down on the ground. Do some reading: https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/author/jon-wayne-taylor/
Ing
Knowing how things unfold and saying he would intentionally targetchildren are two completely different things.
Cato, pretty sure you’re lying because I’ve never met a pilot that couldn’t read.
“…he would intentionally target children”
I never said that. Go back and read my comments again. Maybe get somebody to help you. Maybe read it out loud.
But pay attention to what you wrote. You’re the guy on here fantasizing about murdering someone. You’re the kind of people going to be doing thee killing of innocents. Anybody who is already fantasizing about cowardly murder based on an internet comment that he clearly wasn’t even paying attention to is the kind of easily spun up patsy to be taken advantage of.
You still owe me an apology.
Cato,
While I often find JWT to be a blowhard like most former conventional military dudes, he is right and you are acting naive.
Again, tell me how you lived it.
‘The insurgents won’t be going to fight tanks with their rifles. They will be going to your kid’s school with their rifles.’
Sounds like you are now trying to back out of what you said.
The insurgents are the ones fighting against the tyrannical gun-grabbing govt you dumbass. The govt will be the ones with the tanks.
‘Civil War means dead kids on your doorstep. Civil War means dead kids on your neighbor’s doorstep.’.
How are dead kids going to be on our doorsteps when you’ve blasted all of them in the schools?
When you go to the schools and line up all the kiddies for execution, how will decide who to shoot first? Will you ask them if their mommy or daddy is a 2nd amendment proponent first?
Of all the possible targets, YOU picked schools first.
Not all people that fly on planes are pilots.
Hold your breath for that apology.
And as far as having murder fantasies, anyone advocating targeting non-combatant children isn’t one to talk.
Cato wrote:
“The insurgents are the ones fighting against the tyrannical gun-grabbing govt you dumbass. The govt will be the ones with the tanks.”
You’re correct. And the insurgents won’t go toe-to-toe with the government and their tanks. They will engage in guerilla tactics, among others. Some of these tactics are distasteful when it comes to your delicate sensibilities. JWT made this point. Perhaps all that time as part of an aircrew, with the mandated crew rest made you soft; you lost that edge. That’s fine, but calling out a ground guy for stuff you were literally too far above and of which you have no understanding is pretty tone deaf.
Not a pilot? Well I imagine very few stewardesses can’t read, either.
GRB
Stewardess, that was a good one. I was a Linguist – Arabic and Farsi. I told the Navy and ground guys where the bad guys were so they could capture or kill them and we didn’t send them to schools.
Saying war crimes are distasteful tactics is kind of stupid, especially when JWT is now saying he didn’t say that. And since he’s now saying he didn’t mean what he said, what phuking point do you think JWT actually made? Huh, Forrest?
Knowing how things unfold and saying he would intentionally targetchildren are two completely different things.
Cato, nowhere did JWT say or imply that he would target children.
This is exactly what he said — key words bolded for emphasis: I like to remind officeholders that this would be an insurgency.
The insurgents won’t be going to fight tanks with their rifles. They will be going to your kid’s school with their rifles. They will be right outside your door.
“They” is not “I”.
Slow down and think for a minute before you start running around with your hair on fire.
Are warcrimes not distasteful? Are you saying they aren’t? If so, who is stupid?
The gap in your reading comprehension seems to be that you fail to understand that JWT never said that he, himself, would go to a school. He stated a fact in regards to the way that insurgents fight. He also most certainly used the 3rd person plural pronoun “they”, and not the 1st person “I” or “we”. Where did he indicate that he, himself, would go to a school?
All that foreign language training and experience yet you fail at English.
Ing and GRB
‘I like to remind office holders that this would be an insurgency. The insurgents won’t be going to fight tanks with their rifles. They will be going to your kid’s school with their rifles. They will be right outside your door.’
The office holders being reminded the insurgents will be going to their kids schools would be the left wing gun grabbers, right?
JWT and other pro gun fighters would be the insurgents fighting against the office holders of the tyrannical govt and the ones going to the schools
Do you really think JWT meant to say OTHER insurgents other than himself would show up at the schools?
JWT is a lying, tap-dancing piece of Schitt. You two are just fools. Nice try though.
And I still want to know what insurgencies JWT has lived through as he claims.
Cato,
You can only assume and suppose what JWT meant. However, we can clearly read that you misunderstood it.
And sorry, junior bird man – no one here owes you an explanation you’re not worthy of.
While I might not be owed an explanation of what JWT actually meant, why would you not want to prove what he meant once and for all? Why has he not responded? Please show me what I misunderstood about good insurgents that are pure and bad insurgents that murder kids and which type of insurgent JWT would be.
You can’t.
Cato,
You’re right, I can’t. I cannot because I don’t know JWT at all. I only know what he wrote.
JWT,
I still think you’re kind of a turd.
Cato,
Your murder fantasies and obvious inability to pay attention or control your emotions are pretty big red flags. You need professional help.
I’ll keep waiting on you to act like an adult and apologize before we can discuss further.
GRB
I only know what he wrote too.
He wrote that insurgents would target kids.
Pro gun rights people would be the insurgents.
How many pro gun rights people do you know that would target kids?
Saying pro gun rights people would kill children, how does that kind of talk further the cause of gun rights?
What is it you can’t comprehend?
JWT
Ouch, such a cutting comeback.
I’m sorry you are a liar and a badass want-to-be. Now tell me which insurgencies you witnessed.
Cato/b>, perhaps you should read up on what your “lovable leftists” did in previous conflicts.
In Vietnam the VC and NVA, after torturing and killing the teacher in front of the children, would then jam pencils into the ears of the children.
Or in Afghanistan the Taliban would torture and kill anyone they thought collaborated with western forces, and either enslave the rest of the family or just do the same to them.
No 1 rule of asymmetric warfare. NEVER take on an enemy at their strength. Fight them with their weakness, which in this case would be the agents of oppression and their families. This is why “civil wars” tend to be very dirty affairs.
Southern Cross
You act as if pro gun insurgents fighting a tyrannical govt would act the same way as the VC, Taliban, and ISIS, committing the same war crimes. That is phuking stupid.
How are you going to decide which children to kill? How are you going to pick out the good ones from the bad ones? Do you think the pro gun people will move to one end of the country and all the leftists will move to the other?
What rules of war were officially lifted when we were fighting to VC, Taliban, or ISIS? Tell me about the VC, Taliban, ISIS schools we attacked?
Attack a school and you guarantee a total all-out response.
Cato,
You’re just making up stuff and arguing with yourself. Do you get that? Do you even see that? Can you?
JWT
I’m arguing that examples of insurgents committing war crimes in the past are no excuse to commit them now or in the future. I’m arguing that pro gun people are better than that. I’m arguing that people that target kids deserve to lose.
Remember this line in the oath you took, ‘Cato’?
“…against all enemies, foreign, and domestic.”
Do you understand what it means?
Those who don’t willingly choose to be an enemy have nothing to worry about…
“I’m arguing that pro gun people are better than that. I’m arguing that people that target kids deserve to lose.”
Read your military history, ‘cato’, with an emphasis on comprehension.
Over the long haul, the insurgents win more often than they lose…
I remember my oath, I also remember rules of engagement training and law of war training. Non-combatants are off limits. I don’t consider school children, foreign or domestic, as enemy combatants.
Nothing in military history excuses war crimes whether the insurgents win or lose.
Comprehend that you condescending asshole.
Someone finally gets it. Assassination is the bread & butter of the little guy and if the constable is w/ his family when his time comes then as the saracens say, “God is Great”. It is a dirty form of warfare but then all war is dirty. Our own beloved George Washington played the game and had loyalists “offed” and not by guys wearing uniforms. Benedict Arnold’s liaison was a uniformed British officer, he was caught and hung out of sheer spite. Need we get into our own civil war, the Indian wars (complete w/ broken treaties), war crimes by “the greatest generation”, arming 3 sides of the conflict in Iraq, etc. Do we need to even look at the rest of the world and see we are not so different? Lebanon, Chechen rebellions, Rhodesia, and pretty much the majority of the 20th century in Latin America indeed the world. We are humans its what we do 🙂 Morality is the first casualty of war.
How many innocent kids were killed by US pilots during war? Hundreds? More? JWT never said he would target kids, your reading comprehension needs much work.
The facts are when an insurgency is fighting a government or force that has far superior weapons children will not be exempt from the violence. People seem to think that a war like that in America would be some kind of Disney approved version. It would be horror on a scale that most Americans can’t even comprehend. That horror will touch everyone whether we like it or not. The best thing is to make sure it never happens. Unfortunately the radical left is pushing the country into it. Hopefully reasonable people intervene and stop it.
So no, you can’t recognize what you’re doing. This is a mental illness.
You are delusional.
JWT
I’m mentally ill, yet you are unable to tell me which insurgencies you say you witnessed and how that excuses anyone targeting schools.
Delusional means beliefs not rooted truth. Tell me the truth about the insurgencies you say you witnessed that shaped your logic on the targeting of non combatants.
Then we can talk about delusional…..
I’ve tried to explain that to a few people who have told me the same thing before. If citizens need to stop an out of control tyrannical government there won’t be battle lines. Killing those who support the tyrants would be the targets. Of those in power the number is very small. Their families, homes, etc would be targeted. How many federal employees are going out to seize weapons if they have to worry about their house burning down or their families lives while at work? How many would be available if the power was out in a bunch of liberal cities? How could an army resupply if the private sector who keeps the beans and ammo coming stopped doing their jobs out of fear or just couldn’t because their was no supplies?
This is a huge country. Stopping tens of millions pissed off ex vets, hunters, and just regular red blooded Americans is an impossible task.
Same observation as others have mentioned. There are always bad elements in any insurgency, and there would absolutely be those that target kids. And they would likely be dealt with accordingly.
If you think some of the minute men didn’t steal from citizens, and commit atrocities against Tory loyalists, you’re ignorant. But there were also those that were honorable.
But yeah, soft targets would be the objective of the day. Why fight tanks and drones when you can fight the fuel delivery guy, the mechanic, the computer programmer, the cook, and anybody else in the logistics side? And yes, even the tyrant’s spouse, parents, and extended family? There isn’t a military base big enough or secure enough to protect all of the soft targets.
There wouldn’t be a front line, a rear, or a green zone. No such thing as being “safe” on base or at home. The “insurgency” wouldn’t be people that dressed differently, spoke differently, looked different, went to a different church, ate at different restaurants, or shopped at a different store. It wouldn’t be untrained and uneducated people that don’t even know how old they are, wear sandals, and use iron sighted rusted out 50 year old guns. It wouldn’t be some random stranger from across the ocean. And Blue on Blue attacks wouldn’t be an extremely rare event. It would be the complete opposite of ALL of that.
I support whatever insurgency stops JWT from living off our taxes and telling me to support the United States Government (which uses my tax dollars/seigniorage to fly a rainbow gay pride flag at the US embassy to the Vatican.)
America is the evil empire that wants to take our guns away, kill off white people, criminalize Christianity, make your kids gay, and allow JWT to live off glorified welfare checks.
It sure sounds like you’re jealous of Mr. ‘T’… 😉
It may be getting nigh time to show and prove to the Democrat communists what the 2A was actually written for. It appears it’s the only way they’ll ever understand it.
Time Will Always Tell
They just can’t help but poke the bear, can they!? Problem is, the idiots who draft all these new “laws” won’t be the ones getting hurt when they’re enforced! That’s a shame.
That’s a sick burn.
I support Madison Crawford. His story of overcoming his accident and hardship is an inspiration to me.
Viva Crawford!
The discussion seems to have run toward what happens if an insurgency or civil war breaks out. I sincerely hope it doesn’t come to that. War is never the romanticized version written about in history. It is never the sterile, clinical, kill only the armed opposition fantasy dreamed of by popular media and politicians. Unarmed civilians are the first to die. Innocent children and non combatants die in greater numbers than the armed soldiers or insurgents. Bombs and bullets regularly miss the intended targets.
And, something I’ve noticed over a long career in the Army, and just watching the news. In many cases, especially if it means using it for politics, or to sway public opinion and perceptions, Schools, Hospitals, Playgrounds, Markets, public gatherings and celebrations like weddings etc. get used as shields for those who would use them. Usually the leftist or those who would win at any cost. And, we have those in power today who would have no qualms of using human shields. Or would destroy entire towns or cities to win. Look at what happened at Waco. Look at the recent riots. Politicians running cover for those who would loot, pillage, murder, rape and burn.
Inspiring to see an elected official that gets it.
Kudos to Rep. Crawford. You’re Awesome Sir.
Our Milutary is already in the process of being Spayed and Neutered or Regenderfied (the pessaries Trannies have to wear interfere with combat). At what point will they no longer be a concern? I’d say that time’s approaching faster than Biden can sniff a girl’s bicycle seat. Will Delta Force become Delta Farce? SEAL Teams to become TRANNY ZEAL Teams? Looks that way with each passing day.
Face it, we’ve a large number of politicians that violate and desecrate their oaths of office daily.
You vow to protect and defend all of the Constitution, not just the parts you agree with. Much as I hope Civil War can be averted, I’m not naive enough to think it’s not already happening. We’ve been in a Cold Civil War since Obutthead was (S)Elected. It’ll take very little heat, for the simmering pot to boil over. The ATF’s unlawful and Unconstitutional Rule Changes could easily be the next “shot heard ’round the world.”
” We’ve been in a Cold Civil War since Obutthead was (S)Elected.”
No, a bit earlier than that.
They showed what they want with the ’94 ‘crime bill’, AKA, the ‘Assault weapon ban’…
The Second Amendment had nothing to do with “sporting use” when it became part of the U.S. Constitution, and has nothing to do with “sporting use” today.
@Mad Maxx
“In a real insurrection, the People will outnumber Federal government forces by at least 10 to 1.”
Is that hope, or provable fact? We are not living in a society reflective of the times of the founders, or even Civil War 2.0.
Neither Vietnam, nor any “war” since presented an existential threat to the US government. Waco shows that the federal government is willing to use whatever force is necessary to defeat what it considers an internal enemy. When your (federal government) life is at stake, any and all forms of force are legitimate; survive first, then worry about the optics.
Take a look at how easily the feds convinced so many people that a trespass (or even a riot) was equivalent to civil war, 9/11, Pearl Harbor. The feds are holding very few of the George Floyd rioters in jail, but hold almost every person captured at the “Jan 6 insurrection”. The feds aren’t stupid. Unleashing mobs, and mobs of mobs, on the public is an arrow in the quiver of federal power. The feds can destroy cities without putting even one agent/soldier in danger. Comes “the revolution”, the feds will not hesitate to use whatever force needed to survive.
“Waco shows that the federal government is willing to use whatever force is necessary to defeat what it considers an internal enemy.”
I don’t dispute that in the least, Samuel. at least early in the campaign.
They also have an Achilles’ heel, the media showing their power crushing the insurgents, in living (and dying) color, with flames. They can’t help themselves, it’s instinctual. They will feel a sick glee, we will see that and feel a burning hatred.
The first time that video hits the internet, it will ignite something completely different than Waco, and I think you understand that. There will be little need for organization, anyone can be ‘A Patriot of One’, with what they know about their community and local area.
There is no need for any of that. The ball is in their court. If there is no trouble, there will be no trouble.
“Comes “the revolution”, the feds will not hesitate to use whatever force needed to survive.”
At first. It won’t take long for them to have a serious problem from inside their own ranks. Over 80 percent don’t vote ‘progressive’… 😉
Attack aircraft will have mysterious problems, if you know what I mean. It doesn’t take much to foul the works of a well-oiled machine…
“The first time that video hits the internet, it will ignite something completely different than Waco…”
The Waco atrocity was on every news program, live, in living color….and the nation yawned. Waco was far worse than the Boston massacre and the attempt by the British to capture weapons from the American colonial militias. We are so far beyond where the founders would have removed a tyrannical government.
@Geoff
“But when the word gets out…”
Waco means they will stop at nothing. Bundy1 surprised the feds. At Bundy 2, the feds were prepared. Waco means the military will not stop the feds (the military – National Guard – sided with the fed agencies)
Half the nation on either side….assuming everyone on each side is equally committed to eradicating the other (a very dubious thought).
BTW, “rules of war” are a fiction created to make people feel good about killing other humans “the right way”. War is all hell…to quote a famous US general. Either the government, or the insurgents must win. Otherwise, you have what the US has had since 1865; simmering tensions, with foundational enmities (actually, it has been that way since the founding: Hamilton vs. Jefferson)
When war is unleashed, the only certain outcome is death and destruction. Fighting wars honorably, mercifully, graciously results in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, the never ending war on terrorism. The horrors of WW1 and 2 traumatized western nations so much that there was a general agreement that somehow war could be made humane by setting rules.
“The horrors of WW1 and 2 traumatized western nations so much that there was a general agreement that somehow war could be made humane by setting rules.”
I don’t disagree in the least. However…
One side has many tens of thousands who have seen that, in person over the last 20 years, in far off lands. Their hands have been dirty.
That adds an interesting dynamic to the situation, as few of the socialists have such experience…
“One side has many tens of thousands who have seen that, in person over the last 20 years, in far off lands.”
Don’t believe for a moment that current members of the military, or past members, will “side” with “insurgents”. It is one thing to war in faraway places where you literally have no political or personal stake (other than surviving combat), and another when you are called on to wipe out people you consider “deplorables” in your own country.
The military is not a “conservative” bastion. I left in 1988, after being told that officers were supposed to convince enlisted personnel to wear a complete uniform on duty; convince, not order. By 1994, I sat in mandatory “ethics” briefings for Air Force reserve officers. And now, the Chairman puts marxist propaganda on a recommended reading list for all military.
@Craig
The “Korean conflict/police action/war” resulted in more US deaths than Vietnam: Korea lasted ~3yrs, with estimated 36,000 deaths, or roughly 11,000 deaths per year; “Vietnam” lasted ~12yrs, with estimated 58,000 deaths, or roughly 4833 deaths per year. Yet, Korea is publicly known as “the forgotten war”.
@busybeef
“Why do you think our government wants us disarmed?”
I know why. However, regardless of the number of gun owners, “comes the revolution” ain’t coming.
Waco was a premium example of government tyranny, and it was all over television. Where was the uprising? What is that uncompromising red line the government must cross that will cause all the “patriots” to take to arms, and storm the government? No one seems to know where that red line is, but many claim “We will know it when we see it.”
The “patriots” have accepted Ruby Ridge, Waco, Bundy 1 and 2 as tragic events not warranting any real recognition of what they were. How many more tragic events will be quietly endured? I suspect there really is no limit.
The “cartridge box” ain’t gonna be no answer/fix to government overreach. The ballot box is the battleground, and the nation is pretty evenly divided (and those alleged 100 million gun owners are not all on the side freedom, justice and the American way). We are more in danger of losing the ballot box, than facing “jackbooted government thugs” going door-to-door confiscating weapons and accessories.
BTW, all the cheering over “constitutional carry” is rather silly. Legislation is subject to majority (however defined) rule, changeable with the next power shift. “Constitutional carry” is not victory, but a pause in the onslaught of the leftists, statists, authoritarians, Dims, squads. If we cannot beat back the “fix the vote” movement, decisively, we are done.
Comments are closed.