Bad moon rising

[twoshooter]

I have not been critically concerned so far, but I begin to see a path to the end here, a path that does not HAVE to happen, but is very possible and familiar. I have seen on Facebook where many wholesalers and regional suppliers will now be voluntarily restricting sales to military and LEO personnel. I know of speculation, rumors and fears that the hunters and shooters might throw the Assault weapons owners under the bus, there has been talk of that in years past, all the way back to the Jim Zumbo comments. I think we may be seeing the flip side of the coin here. The "Black Rifle" crowd may be preemptively  throwing the rest of us under the bus, you know- the "we have to destroy the village to save the village" bunch. It is called collaboration, where the Tory's were willing to work with the British to "save" America from the rabble of the rebellious colonists. After all, its not about "hunting" is it? It is about saving us from tyranny by the Government. Who better to prevent that than that the LEO and paramilitary organizations, made up of course of largely ex-military personnel ? They could unite to keep us safe from........ whom??? Food safety inspectors ? Liberty is not about assuring the rights of those you like and agree with. It is about assuring the rights of those you don't...........

[gypsyman]

twoshooter, I agree somewhat. But, when does the rights of others, you don't agree with, overrun your rights, do you draw the line. Freedom to worship is a right in this country, but, when that religion takes another's life, because they dated someone of a different religion, or beheads a person because they believe in a different god, do you step up and do something? Look at whats going on around the world, and ask yourself, do I step up and stop what I see is happening, while I still can? Or, wait untill the evil is much bigger and stronger, and, I might not be able to defeat it. In that case, curl up in a hole and die. Where is the line?? gypsyman

[magooch]

You have to draw the line at the Second Amendment.  There is no need to modify, or clarify what it means and all this classification of this kind of firearm, or that kind of firearm is sophistry and is the gun-grabber's tool to incremental denial of our right to keep and bear arms at all.  You either believe in the right, or you don't and if you don't, you're not an American.

[powderman]

You have to draw the line at the Second Amendment.  There is no need to modify, or clarify what it means and all this classification of this kind of firearm, or that kind of firearm is sophistry and is the gun-grabber's tool to incremental denial of our right to keep and bear arms at all.  You either believe in the right, or you don't and if you don't, you're not an American.

 
MAGOOCH. Very well said Sir. POWDERMAN. 

[Swift One]

No One is going to stop a swat team in a bradley fighting vehicle with an AR.  That being said, we as shooting and hunting enthusiasts do not need to be quarreling and back stabbing each other in order to get the lesser of two evils.  The war is with the gun grabbers- period.  Not amongst us.

[ironglow]

No One is going to stop a swat team in a bradley fighting vehicle with an AR.  That being said, we as shooting and hunting enthusiasts do not need to be quarreling and back stabbing each other in order to get the lesser of two evils.  The war is with the gun grabbers- period.  Not amongst us.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
 
  Right Swifty;   That is exactly what the enemy would like us to do...

[twoshooter]

That was my point. I do not own an AR, never will. 90% of my weapons are single shot, that way I am forced to rely on accuracy and judgement as to when to shoot, not on capacity. I also almost never lose brass, and my ammo bill stays down. For defense, a "riot gun" is my weapon of choice. I support those who do own AR's, simply because I know that more regulation will not help anything. Neither will the firearms companies who will not sell to an average citizen as long as he passes background check, but just to "LEO's and security agency employees". 

[blind ear]

No One is going to stop a swat team in a bradley fighting vehicle with an AR.  That being said, we as shooting and hunting enthusiasts do not need to be quarreling and back stabbing each other in order to get the lesser of two evils.  The war is with the gun grabbers- period.  Not amongst us.

-
any tank or armored vehicle can be stopped with sand pits, gravel pits mud or grease or molotov cocktails. The troops around the tank are protecting the tank, the tank isn't protecting the troops. The tank is a mobile cannon designed to knock out major targets and other tanks. ear

[Swift One]

any tank or armored vehicle can be stopped with sand pits, gravel pits mud or grease or molotov cocktails. The troops around the tank are protecting the tank, the tank isn't protecting the troops. The tank is a mobile cannon designed to knock out major targets and other tanks. ear

Come on man.  Sure, guerilla tactics are out there to be deployed.  Anyone that can think outside the box just a litttle can utilize guerilla tactics.  You arent going to do that though.  Not by yourself my friend.  Your neighbors will sell you out in a heart beat just to keep heat off of them.  This isnt the jungles of nam or the sand box.  This is self absorbed US of A

[Mikey]

Blind ear:  thank you for clarifying that.  Armored vehicles, including the bradley, are not impervious or indefeatable.  The occupants are basically blind to what is going on outside their vehicle and it would be fairly easy to eliminate their security details, which leaves them in a very precarious situation, and they are the bigger target, too. 
 
On a aside, what the liberals do not understand and the commie-crats do but want it changed, is the structure of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  Our most important right is our freedom of speech, which is supported by the 2nd Amendment, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms - in the defense of our freedom of speech.  The 2nd Amendment then goes to protect all those other rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights.  Commies know this, socialistas know this, demicraps know this and that is why they want the 2nd Amendment changed and restricted so badly, so they can do to the rest of the Constitution what they wish to do to the 2nd - re-interpret it to their wishes and subjugate the people. 

[garbhead]

What I have never been able to grasp was "why was the constitution amended to include gun ownership in the first place? It would be impossible to amend the constitution to for every item that it is ok for us to own or to do.   Does the original constitution ban private ownership of firearms?  Just a thought

[Mike in Virginia]

I don't have an AR style rifle either.  Never even fired one.  Someone would have to show me how.  My military time was when they had M1's and M14's.  I do have a pre-ban M1A that I bought when Clinton was about to ban such guns.  I didn't buy it to shoot at people with, or to defend my home.  Just wanted it.  Used to take it deer hunting a lot.  A great deer rifle.  Lots of fun at the range.   
My point is that even though I don't think U.S. citizens have much use for a military style rifle, I'll stand for our rights to have one or ten or all we can get.  I don't know how long we might keep that right, but for now, I wouldn't think of giving an inch just to keep other style guns.  I mean lets no waver at all on what our rights are.  Let's not ever play politics with the liberals with something we already have. 
I still say that we can't keep any gun the law proclaims to be illegal.  Gun rights and self defense we hold so dear, will be gone, gone, gone when the law is changed.  You won't shoot a gov't official in order to keep your guns. 

[Mike in Virginia]

A fellow came to my house last week to fix my heat.  He saw a gun in my house and started talking about himself and guns.  Said he didn't have a gun until all the recent media hype broke out.  Went out and bought a Bushmaster, paid $1200.  Took it home, took the bolt out, and locked the gun up in a safe and the bolt in another safe.  He never did say why he bought it.
Have you ever heard someone say, "I don't have any kind of gun.  I don't hunt, and I don't want a gun in my house." 
Most Americans don't have a clue about gun ownership.  Back up just one generation, and you wouldn't find a home without a gun.  That's how fast the nation is sinking. 

[dwalk]

No One is going to stop a swat team in a bradley fighting vehicle with an AR.  That being said, we as shooting and hunting enthusiasts do not need to be quarreling and back stabbing each other in order to get the lesser of two evils.  The war is with the gun grabbers- period.  Not amongst us.

-
any tank or armored vehicle can be stopped with sand pits, gravel pits mud or grease or molotov cocktails. The troops around the tank are protecting the tank, the tank isn't protecting the troops. The tank is a mobile cannon designed to knock out major targets and other tanks. ear

partially right:


tanks cover infantry...air support and arty cover them all.


if a squad takes fire and cannot marginalize it, they call for arty or a gunship... if they can't handle it...the assets grow larger and more lethal.


when you look at it...they all work together as a team... engage one...you engage them all.


to get close enough to an armored vehicle of today to deliver a Molotov cocktail is indeed suicide. the losses of american armor in today's battlefield engagements is no where near those of WWII; the level of sophistication has increased dramatically in defense against the single or low level attackers.


i was in "Hell on wheels", the 2AD, for a while when in the US Army...it was astounding at the "Power" an armored vehicle/unit can extend...that was during the VN war...now...it's even more awe inspiring.


it's more complicated than that..but the idea is you have no idea, unless you've been involved at those levels with military grade armor engagements, at how effective they are. so much has changed on the battlefield with communications and computer technology that there is no single component that's not covered that it's incredible.

[nw_hunter]

I don't have an AR style rifle either.  Never even fired one.  Someone would have to show me how.  My military time was when they had M1's and M14's.  I do have a pre-ban M1A that I bought when Clinton was about to ban such guns.  I didn't buy it to shoot at people with, or to defend my home.  Just wanted it.  Used to take it deer hunting a lot.  A great deer rifle.  Lots of fun at the range.   
My point is that even though I don't think U.S. citizens have much use for a military style rifle, I'll stand for our rights to have one or ten or all we can get.  I don't know how long we might keep that right, but for now, I wouldn't think of giving an inch just to keep other style guns.  I mean lets no waver at all on what our rights are.  Let's not ever play politics with the liberals with something we already have. 
I still say that we can't keep any gun the law proclaims to be illegal.  Gun rights and self defense we hold so dear, will be gone, gone, gone when the law is changed.  You won't shoot a gov't official in order to keep your guns.

I think you are about my age if you were in during the M1,M14 era. The M14's I carried had a selector to switch from semi to fully auto.So in effect an assault weapon. So! You are familiar with an assault weapon.The idea was to make every man in a squad a machine gunner if need be. BTW! Virginia ranks #1 as the state with the most legally owned machine gun owners. In the USA there are over 500,000 registered machine gun owners. Any Semi auto can be made to fire fully in a jiffy.According to the BATF any weapon that fires with a single pull of the trigger OR any one that can be made to do so, is a Machine Gun.Overnight, there would be millions of machine guns with simple modifications.
I don't think for a moment, that if they call for the surrender of all semi-auto rifles and shotguns all will surrender them.
If you don't think Americans have a need for the so called assault gun, then IMO, you don't believe we need the SECOND AMENDMENT!

[powderman]

If you don't think Americans have a need for the so called assault gun, then IMO, you don't believe we need the SECOND AMENDMENT!

 

     HUNTER. AMEN to that. I hate the term ASSAULT rifle. We should stress DEFENSE rifle. If you have a rifle to defend your family with thats what it is, a DEFENSE rifle. I read that there are millions of these rifles hurting nobody. POWDERMAN. 

[dwalk]

If you don't think Americans have a need for the so called assault gun, then IMO, you don't believe we need the SECOND AMENDMENT!

 

     HUNTER. AMEN to that. I hate the term ASSAULT rifle. We should stress DEFENSE rifle. If you have a rifle to defend your family with thats what it is, a DEFENSE rifle. I read that there are millions of these rifles hurting nobody. POWDERMAN. 

^^^^+1


and...the fear of those millions of rifles has been extended and heightened by the media...ninety-five percent of the public do NOT know what an "Assault weapon" REALLY is...they tremble in fear from the picture painted by the media; legislators being some of the worse fear-mongers of all!


my personal SD/HD is the 870 stoked with #7...at ranges SD/HD occurs, it's difficult to miss with #7 at 15 feet...

[BBF]

No One is going to stop a swat team in a bradley fighting vehicle with an AR.  That being said, we as shooting and hunting enthusiasts do not need to be quarreling and back stabbing each other in order to get the lesser of two evils.  The war is with the gun grabbers- period.  Not amongst us.

However as seen and done in other places, IED's or molotov cocktails would do. Of course it is a risky business but if that is what you got and that is your only choice to fight back you will then decide.

[BUGEYE]

No One is going to stop a swat team in a bradley fighting vehicle with an AR.  That being said, we as shooting and hunting enthusiasts do not need to be quarreling and back stabbing each other in order to get the lesser of two evils.  The war is with the gun grabbers- period.  Not amongst us.

Swat teams do one of two things.  either hide in the bushes or stomp march down the middle of the street.
After the swats couldn't get through a locked "glass" door at Virginia tech while the perp was busy killing people, I lost all respect for them.
regular cops with just a vest and a 9mm have more guts.

[Ranger99]

i have a grass sickle and a machete and
a tractor and bushhog and a chainsaw.
i can use one to cut grass slow or the
other to eat up grass. i can cut brush
and saplings slow or use the other
and eat them up.


i also have a handi rifle and a mini.


they - are - all - tools-! ! !


damn let's stop saying weapons! !


i don't have weapons- i do have some cutlery and firearms
weapon is in the heart and mind - a rock or stick can be a weapon

[dwalk]

SWAT teams are normally trained to deal with one or maybe two belligerents...usually a drunk barricaded in a house/apt...NOT fully armed, trained, opposition...they rely on brute force and fast entry.

[blind ear]

No One is going to stop a swat team in a bradley fighting vehicle with an AR.  That being said, we as shooting and hunting enthusiasts do not need to be quarreling and back stabbing each other in order to get the lesser of two evils.  The war is with the gun grabbers- period.  Not amongst us.

-
any tank or armored vehicle can be stopped with sand pits, gravel pits mud or grease or molotov cocktails. The troops around the tank are protecting the tank, the tank isn't protecting the troops. The tank is a mobile cannon designed to knock out major targets and other tanks. ear

partially right:


tanks cover infantry...air support and arty cover them all.


if a squad takes fire and cannot marginalize it, they call for arty or a gunship... if they can't handle it...the assets grow larger and more lethal.


when you look at it...they all work together as a team... engage one...you engage them all.


to get close enough to an armored vehicle of today to deliver a Molotov cocktail is indeed suicide. the losses of american armor in today's battlefield engagements is no where near those of WWII; the level of sophistication has increased dramatically in defense against the single or low level attackers.


i was in "Hell on wheels", the 2AD, for a while when in the US Army...it was astounding at the "Power" an armored vehicle/unit can extend...that was during the VN war...now...it's even more awe inspiring.


it's more complicated than that..but the idea is you have no idea, unless you've been involved at those levels with military grade armor engagements, at how effective they are. so much has changed on the battlefield with communications and computer technology that there is no single component that's not covered that it's incredible.

-
Armored will rule in the desert or open terrain but get the tanks in cities and they are vulnerable to attacks from above with cocktails and other things. That is when troops have to sweep ahead of the armored unit so the road won't be jammed with disabled tanks and troop carriers. ear

[BBF]

Armor doesn't fair well in swamps or mountains either.

[dwalk]

Armor doesn't fair well in swamps or mountains either.

very true...but our population centers are located in cities...most major cities are not in swamps or mountains...


a civil uprising would have to be in monumental proportions in order to order armor into a megapolis where they were vulnerable...if it ever comes to that...we'll be at war...not civil disobedience.


armor was used with limited success in VN...among other successes with it was the APC's that delivered the mech inf..the M113 was highly vulnerable to RPG attack, though...but we all know that RPG's are illegal to own here...

[briarpatch]

Armor today is not your granddads armor. Tactics today is not your granddads tactics. A cocktail want stop new armor or slow it down. When tanks are in any area so are troops helio, planes, surveillance etc. The military has plans for those that resist and have had them a while. 

[blind ear]

Armor today is not your granddads armor. Tactics today is not your granddads tactics. A cocktail want stop new armor or slow it down. When tanks are in any area so are troops helio, planes, surveillance etc. The military has plans for those that resist and have had them a while.

-
What is the on board air supply of modern armor? ear

[briarpatch]

The whole world is at the crews nose with filtrated systems and oxygen supply. A tank is not a static object and if you can stop one and gather around like cavemen on a mammoth. It can still hurt you. 

[Wagguy80]

Actually most armored vehicles now have external halon extinguishers that can be triggered killing all inside.  They also require fuel, and a regular source of it.  Tanks are gas guzzlers.


The US military is hopelessly outnumbered, and surrounded by just the small % of gun owners willing to fight for their rights.  We're not there yet, however if we don't stand firm together, and then fight to push the tide back we will find ourselves there within the next 2 generations.

[Anna]

As far as answering a question from someone whether or not do I own a firearm. That would depend
on who is doing the asking. If its some punk acting like your friend but is really fishing for his next
burglary. That is when you go totally libtard on them and they lose interest.
That is actually a good way to act around many strangers now days but it takes a lot of practice
to appear to be totally stupid and self absorbed. But you can do it with a little practice if you try .


 

[ironglow]

No One is going to stop a swat team in a bradley fighting vehicle with an AR.  That being said, we as shooting and hunting enthusiasts do not need to be quarreling and back stabbing each other in order to get the lesser of two evils.  The war is with the gun grabbers- period.  Not amongst us.

-
any tank or armored vehicle can be stopped with sand pits, gravel pits mud or grease or molotov cocktails. The troops around the tank are protecting the tank, the tank isn't protecting the troops. The tank is a mobile cannon designed to knock out major targets and other tanks. ear

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
 
  As an old tanker, I must interject here;
 A) One of the primary rules of tank warfare is to maintain mobility .  During Desert Storm one of the great mistake the Iraqi Republican Guard tankers made (besides having inferior tanks), was to remain in a static position.
B)  We always drove around such obstacles, and to my knowledge Nobody has yet produced portable sand pits, gravel pits or mud pits...Besides,  it would a severe example of same to hamper a tank. 
C) Troops & tanks...it's a symbiotic relationship, each protects/supports the other.  Don't believe the movies showing troops swarming on tanks..     Tanks also protect tanks...in such a situation, tankers wirl "sweep each other off" with a light machine gun.
D) Tanks don't engage only "hard" targets, such as other tanks".  Rule of engagement when emerging upon the field..engage any target of opportunity...starting with whatever is the more threatening to your tank..   There is a regular list..goes something like this; Tanks, other armored, artillery, troops with sholder held weapons, trucks, troop formations etc.
E) Can't quite figure wher the grease comes in...perhaps a portable grease field half a foot deep?
F) Molotov cocktails are a WW2 item..no longer effective.  First somebody has to be within a few feet of the tank..risky!   then there are fire extinguishers and Chobham armor..and other tanks & infantry sweeping the tanks off.
G)  Check even the use of armor in the crowded cities of Iraq...no instances I know of where Molotov cocktails were employed..and the terrorists are very adept at employing primitive weapons.
H) If tanks were so easily disabled, why would we be paying $6, 200,000 for each new Abrams M1 2a which rolls out?
 
   All that being said, guerilla warfare can be very effective, as is being proven every day in the sandbox and the rockpile..  Tanks are too costly, so they can't be everywhere.
 
  BTW:  Ear;  I hope I didn't sound rude..but there is a certain defensive wall which comes up, when I hear of tanks being minimized..