“Gun Control” Advocates Expect Tanks And Drones To Be Used Against US Citizens

One tradition views private gun ownership as important for resisting tyranny; the other views guns as, at best, a necessary evil, and at worst, something we should discard to become a fully civilized society.

Gun-control advocates scoff at the suggestion that personal arms can stand up to tanks and drones. But the anti-tyranny argument is not so much based on efficacy as it is on power: who has it and why.

The gun debate is a culture debate | Fox News

If these flaming morons had half a brain, they would join in the battle to prevent tyranny – rather than taking comfort in it.

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to “Gun Control” Advocates Expect Tanks And Drones To Be Used Against US Citizens

  1. kim2ooo says:

    Reblogged this on Climate Ponderings.

  2. gator69 says:

    It really isn’t about being able to defeat the military, who would likely turn on the POTUS. But even if they did attack American citizens, it would be a blood bath, and neither party would survive that. Defeating the military is a red herring.

    And now for something completely different…

    “It’s still very early days for 3D-printed guns — the first of its kind was only made last year. Since MakerBot pulled gun blueprints from its Thingiverse site, Defense Distributed has been hosting these hotly debated files on its own site with the promise of never taking them down because of political pressure.”


    This is what I call “Liberty”.

  3. leftinbrooklyn says:

    ‘If these flaming morons had half a brain, they would join in the battle to prevent tyranny – rather than taking comfort in it.’

    Their cowardice is too strong.

    • Not morons nor cowards, per se. It is religiously-held delusion, characterized by reason-overpowering hatred of the “enemy” (Republicans/Conservatives, or anyone against Obama). I can see Obama’s 2nd term will be one long attempted, adolescent thumbing of the nose by the Insane Left (metaphorically speaking, and in the most infuriating ways they can think of), at those who believe in individual freedoms over the will of the State.

  4. I. Lou Minotti says:

    “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government . . .” ~Thomas Jefferson (Tom DeWeese, “Why the Founding Fathers Matter”):

    “Government is Force and Requires Constitutional Limits:”

    “A government at bottom is nothing more than a group of men, and as a practical matter most of them are inferior men . . . [note the parallel in Dan. 4:17, “. . . and sets over it the lowliest of men]”
    (H.L. Mencken, as quoted by John Stossel in “There Ought Not to Be a Law”):

  5. villabolo says:

    Actually, both sides expect that scenario.

  6. higley7 says:

    They fail to remember the hunting culture of the US. We are a nation of snipers, outnumbering the military probably >50 to 1 and are perfectly capable of corralling an armored car and simply waiting until the occupants have to come out, then it’s target practice, if they are aggressive. Our hunting rifles are incredibly devastating on the human body, relative to an AR-15, as they are designed to take down much larger prey. The distances that we can use and the number of snipers means that only their bases are safe places to be. trying to take over the country puts them a great personal risk.

  7. redc1c4 says:


    amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics.

    the most vulnerable point on an M1 Abrams is the fuel convoy. interdict the LOGPAC and all you have is a very large, expensive and oh so vulnerable pillbox waiting to burn.
    if the drones can’t get fuel, and the bases can’t get food, and the cops can’t drive their cars, and the DHS M-RAPs are dry, what then?

    no spare parts for the inevitable breakdowns, holes in the transformers that supply the electrical power to necessary offices or bases, and the thousand and one other soft targets they can’t possibly protect?

    be careful what you ask for, you might just get it.

Leave a Reply