America celebrates the 4th of July in the traditional way.

[Zetsu]

If it's a revolution, it's not just the police/SWAT you'll be dealing with, you'll have to expect to face the US military, the government have a endless of resources and insane amount of training and experience in guerrilla warfare.  Chances are your firearms will be effectiveless against their any armoured vehicle while.  While your phones, walkie talkies will betray you, etc.

The standard issue police have a system for monitoring all forms of electronic activity when they are searching for someone. My buddy with the marshals was telling me all about it. No doubt there will be people picked off in this manner. Meanwhile, the command structure for the civilian forces would be quickly decimated and overrun. The military COULD mobilize against the public. The question is WOULD they. We dont know for sure because we havent seen it happen. Marshal Law would have to be in place first. It would be a bloodbath. The military would be extremely demoralized at the least and after 1 week, the rest of the populace would turn on the military AND what was left of the government. Regime change would follow soon after would be my guess.



Something else to consider is unlike all other countries, Americans have quite a bit of night vision gear, enabling us to see at night. I have a thermal scope mounted to a .22. People make fun of me for putting a $1800 scope on a $300 rifle.....until they see me use it in twilight to shoot varmints. Then they want one for themselves!



Again, America is unlike all other countries. Its not gonna be a cakewalk for the authorities during a civil war. Hell, I bet a group of your average hog hunters could take over just about any medium sized city in Europe with their night gear.

I'm no US lawyer, but I'm very sure if there is an attempt to annihilate the government, there's no question the military will be used.  I don't know what makes you think the military will be demoralized and will lose about in a week when the US have fought multiple entire nations nearly non-stop for over half a century, same goes for Hong Kong's rioters were hopeless just against their average police, no SWAT were ever needed to be deployed, no morale issues from HK cops and I doubt the average American police/soldier will suffer from any either.



In regards to having night vision/infra-red, the way I see it is you have a gun along with a thermal scope, lets say it gives a "creature" like you a 2-dimension advantage, while US forces is what I would call a "beast" with at least 12-dimensions of advantage.  



You should go check out some of the new inventions the US military have came up with to take out terrorist, from smart grenade launchers with precise detination timing, to bombs that can engulf the entire interior of any cave into flames, to bullet radar giving out location of an enemy sniper, etc.



What you're using is mostly the same tech from post WWII, against the most advance, experience and professionally train military in the entire world.  Considering even China's army and their civilians with rifles were hopeless to stop the IJA during WWII, which is already a much more leveled playing field, chances of pro-gun owners winning against the best of the best is less than 1%.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone seriously think throwing out the Second will lower gun violence in the States. I don't care what the Americans do. I am just pointing out there are three hundred million firearms in the States. Good luck lowering violent crime by making guns illegal.

[Zetsu]

Does anyone seriously think throwing out the Second will lower gun violence in the States. I don't care what the Americans do. I am just pointing out there are three hundred million firearms in the States. Good luck lowering violent crime by making guns illegal.

I know it sounds hopeless, but you must start from some point, best way is to give people incentive to turn them in, even if it takes a few decades to scrap them all.

[Lokmar]

The standard issue police have a system for monitoring all forms of electronic activity when they are searching for someone. My buddy with the marshals was telling me all about it. No doubt there will be people picked off in this manner. Meanwhile, the command structure for the civilian forces would be quickly decimated and overrun. The military COULD mobilize against the public. The question is WOULD they. We dont know for sure because we havent seen it happen. Marshal Law would have to be in place first. It would be a bloodbath. The military would be extremely demoralized at the least and after 1 week, the rest of the populace would turn on the military AND what was left of the government. Regime change would follow soon after would be my guess.



Something else to consider is unlike all other countries, Americans have quite a bit of night vision gear, enabling us to see at night. I have a thermal scope mounted to a .22. People make fun of me for putting a $1800 scope on a $300 rifle.....until they see me use it in twilight to shoot varmints. Then they want one for themselves!



Again, America is unlike all other countries. Its not gonna be a cakewalk for the authorities during a civil war. Hell, I bet a group of your average hog hunters could take over just about any medium sized city in Europe with their night gear.

I'm no US lawyer, but I'm very sure if there is an attempt to annihilate the government, there's no question the military will be used.  I don't know what makes you think the military will be demoralized and will lose about in a week when the US have fought multiple entire nations nearly non-stop for over half a century, same goes for Hong Kong's rioters were hopeless just against their average police, no SWAT were ever needed to be deployed, no morale issues from HK cops and I doubt the average American police/soldier will suffer from any either.



In regards to having night vision/infra-red, the way I see it is you have a gun along with a thermal scope, lets say it gives a "creature" like you a 2-dimension advantage, while US forces is what I would call a "beast" with at least 12-dimensions of advantage.  



You should go check out some of the new inventions the US military have came up with to take out terrorist, from smart grenade launchers with precise detination timing, to bombs that can engulf the entire interior of any cave into flames, to bullet radar giving out location of an enemy sniper, etc.



What you're using is mostly the same tech from post WWII, against the most advance, experience and professionally train military in the entire world.  Considering even China's army and their civilians with rifles weren't able to stop the IJA during WWII, chances of pro-gun owners winning against the best of the best is less than 1%.

The military cannot engage in America without Martial Law. That sounds like a minor thing but psychologically, its huge. That would instantly trigger major backlash against the government, making their problem worse. The American Military has never faced an armed civilian populace like it has in its own back yard. Their bases are surrounded by those same people. Attacking and killing their own people would be hugely demoralizing. There would be desertions and refusals to follow orders constantly. We've already had dozens of statements by civilian police stating that they will NEVER comply with disarming the populace so you can count on those specific agencies to either help or step aside.



Again, the dynamics are completely different in America compared to anywhere else in the world.



The military's only hope of stopping an armed insurrection by the people would be to use weaponry that would turn their supporters against them. Then the military would implode.

[Lokmar]

Does anyone seriously think throwing out the Second will lower gun violence in the States. I don't care what the Americans do. I am just pointing out there are three hundred million firearms in the States. Good luck lowering violent crime by making guns illegal.

I know it sounds hopeless, but you must start from some point, best way is to give people incentive to turn them in, even if it takes a few decades to scrap them all.

Never happen. Political assassinations would rule the day. Most politicians that advocated for repeal of the 2nd Amendment would be unelectable.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone seriously think throwing out the Second will lower gun violence in the States. I don't care what the Americans do. I am just pointing out there are three hundred million firearms in the States. Good luck lowering violent crime by making guns illegal.

I know it sounds hopeless, but you must start from some point, best way is to give people incentive to turn them in, even if it takes a few decades to scrap them all.

Criminals keeping their guns is an incentive to keep, not surrender legal firearms. I am certain violent crime would soar if legal firearms were surrendered.



Knowing potential random victims could have firearms in their home acts as a deterrent. Taking away firearms in some countries may have the effect of lowering violent crime rates, but in States?? Fuggedaboutit.

[Zetsu]

I'm no US lawyer, but I'm very sure if there is an attempt to annihilate the government, there's no question the military will be used.  I don't know what makes you think the military will be demoralized and will lose about in a week when the US have fought multiple entire nations nearly non-stop for over half a century, same goes for Hong Kong's rioters were hopeless just against their average police, no SWAT were ever needed to be deployed, no morale issues from HK cops and I doubt the average American police/soldier will suffer from any either.



In regards to having night vision/infra-red, the way I see it is you have a gun along with a thermal scope, lets say it gives a "creature" like you a 2-dimension advantage, while US forces is what I would call a "beast" with at least 12-dimensions of advantage.  



You should go check out some of the new inventions the US military have came up with to take out terrorist, from smart grenade launchers with precise detination timing, to bombs that can engulf the entire interior of any cave into flames, to bullet radar giving out location of an enemy sniper, etc.



What you're using is mostly the same tech from post WWII, against the most advance, experience and professionally train military in the entire world.  Considering even China's army and their civilians with rifles weren't able to stop the IJA during WWII, chances of pro-gun owners winning against the best of the best is less than 1%.

The military cannot engage in America without Martial Law. That sounds like a minor thing but psychologically, its huge. That would instantly trigger major backlash against the government, making their problem worse. The American Military has never faced an armed civilian populace like it has in its own back yard. Their bases are surrounded by those same people. Attacking and killing their own people would be hugely demoralizing. There would be desertions and refusals to follow orders constantly. We've already had dozens of statements by civilian police stating that they will NEVER comply with disarming the populace so you can count on those specific agencies to either help or step aside.



Again, the dynamics are completely different in America compared to anywhere else in the world.



The military's only hope of stopping an armed insurrection by the people would be to use weaponry that would turn their supporters against them. Then the military would implode.

From wiki it says the US president or congress alone already can impose martial law.  But lets just say if there is a armed revolution starting and hell breaks lose into full scale in less than a week and martial law is imposed.



You failed to understand the training soldiers go through, soldier's are trained to get the job done, that's it, not let their feelings decide.  Lets say even if half of the US military resigns, less than 1% doesn't resigns and goes rogue, it will still make no difference.  The problem is not in numbers of people or guns, but the immense gap in technology.  Even if the US base are surrounded by pro-gun people, tell me what can they do?  Just their lightest combat vehicle, the HUMVEE can stop nearly any bullets, even if some have .50 sniper rifles, they'll just hide in their APCs or MBTs and nothing can be done.



You won't stand a chance against them on the battlefield, so what can you do?  Snipe from your own home or an abandon building.  But the military is not retarded as they'll patrol in armoured vehicles and the M1's German forged main gun can level the entire hideout with just 1 shot;  Afterwards everyone in the hideout will be crying for help from building's collapse rubble.  



IEDs are useless as they from their experience in Afgan/Iraq they can just use radio jammers everywhere they go, unless you use wired the IED to your detinator it'll just give away your location.  And most importantly, the government can see everything you do on your smartphone if they wanted to, it'll most likely give away the whole list of rebels and who to look for.



This is just one of the most simple and common scenario why the military will win hands down, without any sweat or dent.  There are other factors, but the chance of the rebels winning is non-existent so I won't mention them.

[Lokmar]

The military cannot engage in America without Martial Law. That sounds like a minor thing but psychologically, its huge. That would instantly trigger major backlash against the government, making their problem worse. The American Military has never faced an armed civilian populace like it has in its own back yard. Their bases are surrounded by those same people. Attacking and killing their own people would be hugely demoralizing. There would be desertions and refusals to follow orders constantly. We've already had dozens of statements by civilian police stating that they will NEVER comply with disarming the populace so you can count on those specific agencies to either help or step aside.



Again, the dynamics are completely different in America compared to anywhere else in the world.



The military's only hope of stopping an armed insurrection by the people would be to use weaponry that would turn their supporters against them. Then the military would implode.

From wiki it says the US president or congress alone already can impose martial law.  But lets just say if there is a armed revolution starting and hell breaks lose into full scale in less than a week and martial law is imposed.



You failed to understand the training soldiers go through, soldier's are trained to get the job done, that's it, not let their feelings decide.  Lets say even if half of the US military resigns, less than 1% doesn't resigns and goes rogue, it will still make no difference.  The problem is not in numbers of people or guns, but the immense gap in technology.  Even if the US base are surrounded by pro-gun people, tell me what can they do?  Just their lightest combat vehicle, the HUMVEE can stop nearly any bullets, even if some have .50 sniper rifles, they'll just hide in their APCs or MBTs and nothing can be done.



You won't stand a chance against them on the battlefield, so what can you do?  Snipe from your own home or an abandon building.  But the military is not retarded as they'll patrol in armoured vehicles and the M1's German forged main gun can level the entire hideout with just 1 shot;  Afterwards everyone in the hideout will be crying for help from building's collapse rubble.  



IEDs are useless as they from their experience in Afgan/Iraq they can just use radio jammers everywhere they go, unless you use wired the IED to your detinator it'll just give away your location.  And most importantly, the government can see everything you do on your smartphone if they wanted to, it'll most likely give away the whole list of rebels and who to look for.



This is just one of the most simple and common scenario why the military will win hands down, without any sweat or dent.  There are other factors, but they chance of the rebels winning is non-existent so I won't mention them.

There's not enough military in this country to successfully stop an all out civil war. There's also no chance of repealing the 2nd Amendment. American civilians will continue to have the ability to purchase and keep guns because the horrors of the alternative are far too great.

[Zetsu]

From wiki it says the US president or congress alone already can impose martial law.  But lets just say if there is a armed revolution starting and hell breaks lose into full scale in less than a week and martial law is imposed.



You failed to understand the training soldiers go through, soldier's are trained to get the job done, that's it, not let their feelings decide.  Lets say even if half of the US military resigns, less than 1% doesn't resigns and goes rogue, it will still make no difference.  The problem is not in numbers of people or guns, but the immense gap in technology.  Even if the US base are surrounded by pro-gun people, tell me what can they do?  Just their lightest combat vehicle, the HUMVEE can stop nearly any bullets, even if some have .50 sniper rifles, they'll just hide in their APCs or MBTs and nothing can be done.



You won't stand a chance against them on the battlefield, so what can you do?  Snipe from your own home or an abandon building.  But the military is not retarded as they'll patrol in armoured vehicles and the M1's German forged main gun can level the entire hideout with just 1 shot;  Afterwards everyone in the hideout will be crying for help from building's collapse rubble.  



IEDs are useless as they from their experience in Afgan/Iraq they can just use radio jammers everywhere they go, unless you use wired the IED to your detinator it'll just give away your location.  And most importantly, the government can see everything you do on your smartphone if they wanted to, it'll most likely give away the whole list of rebels and who to look for.



This is just one of the most simple and common scenario why the military will win hands down, without any sweat or dent.  There are other factors, but they chance of the rebels winning is non-existent so I won't mention them.

There's not enough military in this country to successfully stop an all out civil war. There's also no chance of repealing the 2nd Amendment. American civilians will continue to have the ability to purchase and keep guns because the horrors of the alternative are far too great.

The problem doesn't lies in which side has more guns, but who has the technological superiority.  And the government first thing to do is raid or destroy all the gun factories, if not they can just freeze people's bank account from being able to withdraw money.



Lets say half of the police and military resigns, you still have about 2 million police/soldiers on duty in the US.  And for the rebelling side, lets say only 4/5 of the men and 1/5 of the women fights, and people under age 20 or over 55 are excluded due to age factors.  Technically it'll be 2 million police/soldiers vs 50 million rebels.  With only 50 million pro gun owners to take on the US military/local authorities, there'll be only blood bath on one side, and it's obvious who will be on the receiving end, I don't understand how is this even a debate and there's no contest.



Edit: 50 million people on the rebellion side is already being generous, most likely not much people will be in the shape or have the will to fight, and the number is expected closer to about 25 to 30 million against 2 million US forces.

[Lokmar]

There's not enough military in this country to successfully stop an all out civil war. There's also no chance of repealing the 2nd Amendment. American civilians will continue to have the ability to purchase and keep guns because the horrors of the alternative are far too great.

The problem doesn't lies in which side has more guns, but who has the technological superiority.  And the government first thing to do is raid or destroy all the gun factories, if not they can just freeze people's bank account from being able to withdraw money.



Lets say half of the police and military resigns, you still have about 2 million police/soldiers on duty in the US.  And for the rebelling side, lets say only 4/5 of the men and 1/5 of the women fights, and people under age 20 or over 55 are excluded due to age factors.  Technically it'll be 2 million police/soldiers vs 50 million rebels.  With only 50 million pro gun owners to take on the US military/local authorities, there'll be only blood bath on one side, and it's obvious who will be on the receiving end, I don't understand how is this even a debate and there's no contest.

There would be a severe psychological collapse in the military from killing their own people. By the time 5 million citizens were dead, public opinion would solidify against the military and their authority and command structure would break down. Lets just say Australia had to put 5 million citizens down who were rioting with pitchforks. That would be the end of its government.

[Odinson]

An army works in unison while the armed citizenry is a loosely organized armed mob.



For the civil war to work, the rebelling side needs an army too.

[Zetsu]

The problem doesn't lies in which side has more guns, but who has the technological superiority.  And the government first thing to do is raid or destroy all the gun factories, if not they can just freeze people's bank account from being able to withdraw money.



Lets say half of the police and military resigns, you still have about 2 million police/soldiers on duty in the US.  And for the rebelling side, lets say only 4/5 of the men and 1/5 of the women fights, and people under age 20 or over 55 are excluded due to age factors.  Technically it'll be 2 million police/soldiers vs 50 million rebels.  With only 50 million pro gun owners to take on the US military/local authorities, there'll be only blood bath on one side, and it's obvious who will be on the receiving end, I don't understand how is this even a debate and there's no contest.

There would be a severe psychological collapse in the military from killing their own people. By the time 5 million citizens were dead, public opinion would solidify against the military and their authority and command structure would break down. Lets just say Australia had to put 5 million citizens down who were rioting with pitchforks. That would be the end of its government.

Tb fair, the same logic can be applied to the rebellion group, the only difference is soldiers are a lot more resilient than the average person from having to go through a mental break down.  If they don't want to fight or have a mental break down, they fall into the resigned category.

[Zetsu]

And I forgot they can't even resign technically due to contracts, but they can still surrender or go MIA and never return to base, which is the same I guess.

[Zetsu]

I know it sounds hopeless, but you must start from some point, best way is to give people incentive to turn them in, even if it takes a few decades to scrap them all.

Criminals keeping their guns is an incentive to keep, not surrender legal firearms. I am certain violent crime would soar if legal firearms were surrendered.



Knowing potential random victims could have firearms in their home acts as a deterrent. Taking away firearms in some countries may have the effect of lowering violent crime rates, but in States?? Fuggedaboutit.

The criminals might not turn them in, but a lot of them do throw away the gun, which is evidence for being convicted after committing a crime.  As long as you prevent them from resupplying it'll definitely slowly curb gun violence in the US.

[Odinson]

Talk about the guns.



Guns or not... The home invasions, rapes, muggings, murders are still gonna be around.





And you dont have the power to stop them.





The packs of niggers and spics are gonna take over the whole neighborhood.



You are alone... They have the numbers.



You cant go anywhere.