The Civil War of 2016

[HankB]

Social Security Administration wants 175,000 Rounds of Hollowpoint .357 SIG ammo

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=6c39a2a9f00a10187a1432388a3301e5&tab=core&_cview=0&fb_source=message

Granny better behave herself if her check is late . . .

[longeyes]

The next civil war, if there is one, won't be about hollow points, more about hollow heads.  Bureaucrats think in terms of requisition orders, not carnage.  This is all some kind of adolescent wet dream.  If and when the "authorities" really start taking down ordinary American citizens everything will be on the table, and it won't go according to the plans hatched in cubicles and boardrooms, on spreadsheets and flow charts.

[Balog]

There simply aren't enough people with an understanding or appreciation of the Constitution to start a real live war over it. The only real possibility I could foresee (and I don't consider it too likely) is a Northern Ireland style limited insurgency. And between the media demonization that would accompany that, and fed.gov's ability to monitor us... I don't think it'd last long.

[Blakenzy]

There simply aren't enough people with an understanding or appreciation of the Constitution to start a real live war over it.

And that is the real fight right there. Informing people and waking them up to the painful truths and realities we face as citizens. We do not have a representative government and we are not free. We don't have leaders but rulers. Politicians are owned and respond only to select private interests. As George Carlin put it "This Country has Owners and it ain't you.."

There is no way that direct violence will overthrow the current corrupt system at this time, because the system still lives strong in people's minds. The only chance we have is exposing its ugliness, theft, violence, lies and injustice and developing a new paradigm of thought: there is no legitimacy in the current GIGANTIC central Government and its Dempublican party, it doesn't work for us and it doesn't serve us or what we stand for. When people begin seeing the President of the United States of America as though he might be the King of England, then we will be getting somewhere.

When enough people are enlightened to see through the heavy curtain of Government propaganda (and it's THICK), things will have to change. Things would change right now if the people weren't so mentally enslaved to the idea that it's red vs. blue when in fact it's the State vs. You.

[Balog]

Good luck with that.

[Tallpine]

It's always been this way: tyrants versus the peasants.

The American Experiment with liberty is was an eye blink in human history.

[LadySmith]

When people begin seeing the President of the United States of America as though he might be the King of England, then we will be getting somewhere.

We're already there, and it seems like way too many folk want a king over here.

[longeyes]

There is one word we got to know well in the last decade: asymmetric.

Of course Central Authority has all the cards, or seems to, but I really wonder if the people in government have the stomach to deal with the kind of small-scale anarchy that might be unleashed if they truly start playing with big elbows.

Society is held together by adherence to certain basic rules.  One of those rules is that your government doesn't kill people you know.  The government violates that at its own risk.

"Rebels" don't have to win military victories, they just have to make the price of waging war and living one's life high enough to destroy the morale of the side with overwhelming force.  

None of us here really know how outright tyranny would play out in America, but I think making any assumptions about it are unwise.  All we know is it would be very bad--for both sides.

[seeker_two]

There simply aren't enough people with an understanding or appreciation of the Constitution to start a real live war over it. The only real possibility I could foresee (and I don't consider it too likely) is a Northern Ireland style limited insurgency. And between the media demonization that would accompany that, and fed.gov's ability to monitor us... I don't think it'd last long.

I'd hardly call Northern Ireland "limited"....but it's a good example of what's to come. Also, considering the damage that hackers like Anonymous can do to electronic infrastructure, future insurrectionists may do even more damage than truck bombs & targeted assasinations.....but those will still happen too.

I'm not looking forward to the next 50 years.....

[longeyes]

I am, but only because the alternative is worse.  :)

Totalitarians always have fantasies about complete control.  That might have worked in a time where technology and travel were difficult or non-existent.  Not today.  And mobility and technology cut two ways. 

On the whole my advice to Power would be: Cool it.

[AJ Dual]

I'd hardly call Northern Ireland "limited"....but it's a good example of what's to come. Also, considering the damage that hackers like Anonymous can do to electronic infrastructure, future insurrectionists may do even more damage than truck bombs & targeted assasinations.....but those will still happen too.

I'm not looking forward to the next 50 years.....

Yep, "The Troubles" are a prime example of how a really small group of people can create a struggle that lasts decades. Actual IRA bombers/kneecappers/triggermen operating in N. Ireland at any given moment was probably just in the teens. And that tied up a sizeable portion of the entire British Army.

Say there's 50 Million American gun-owners who are politically aware on the nominal Libertarian/Right/Limited .gov side of the coin.

Say 1% of them are "willing to do something about it". That's 500,000 people.

Say 1% of those 500,000 who might do something like give logistical support, cover, safe houses, money, intel... whatever, are actually willing to pull a trigger, that's 5000.

It's a bad comparison, but look at what one Tim McVeigh did, or how the two Beltway Snipers tied everything up in knots for weeks or months. And instead of just evil randomness against citizens, these theoretical 5000 are actively plotting/gunning against the people and institutions they feel are "part of the problem".

Hell, let's be even more conservative. Imagine just fifty people all acting out at once.

[Tallpine]

I'm not looking forward to the next 50 years.....

I don't have another 50 years.

And neither do I want to die in a nursing home 

[Hawkmoon]

I didn't mean that as condescending. Just realized it came off that way.

What I meant was, independent thought is encouraged much more in young soldiers than it was in the 70s, and protecting Americans is given serious weight. And, considering the national guards devotion to their communities, they'd likely side with the locals

I hope you're right, but look how all that National Guard "devotion" worked out at Kent State.

What is necessary is for a significant number of both NCOs and senior commissioned officers (preferably field grade) to remember that the oath they aware was to the Constitution, not to the government or to the administration currently in power. There was a time when I believed that there might be significant numbers of senior commissioned officers who secretly remembered and would honor that oath. Today ... I'm not so sure.

[gunsmith]

Highly unlikely that a .40 cal pistol is going to stop a hurricane or tornado or blizzard, so how DO they justify this?

"you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows" Bob Dylan

Quote from: Fitz on August 12, 2012, 10:56:32 AM
I didn't mean that as condescending. Just realized it came off that way.

Didn't sound condescending to me, I certainly hope you're right.

I recall seeing a video during Katrina, CA cops in Louisiana - confiscating guns!
I cant recall if the Nat Guard participated or not.

I do however think the LE/military will focus on LA/NYC/SF etc & leave the smaller cities alone if TSHTF  and rural folks will be left to their own resources.

[Fitz]

I hope you're right, but look how all that National Guard "devotion" worked out at Kent State.

What is necessary is for a significant number of both NCOs and senior commissioned officers (preferably field grade) to remember that the oath they aware was to the Constitution, not to the government or to the administration currently in power. There was a time when I believed that there might be significant numbers of senior commissioned officers who secretly remembered and would honor that oath. Today ... I'm not so sure.

Again... Kent State was a long time ago, and a completely different military.

[MrsSmith]

I agree with Fitz on this one. I have a LOT of friends on active duty, active reserve, or Guard, and I would stake my life on not one of them being willing to raise their weapon to US Citizens who weren't actively engaging in terrorism. And ever single one of them is smart enough to know the difference between an armed (or peaceful) rebellion and terrorism.


AJ, I'm in complete agreement with you - and I see Tallpine's itching to tag along!

[AZRedhawk44]

http://www.graystatemovie.com/

[Blakenzy]

I am not too sure. It's nothing against the moral character of the individual troops, but against the track record of those in power. With enough lies and misinformation, they can get anyone who is already willingly subservient to them to do pretty much anything regardless of how wrong it may seem. The only way to avoid being manipulated is to be willing to divorce yourself completely from them, and see them as foreign. So, unless entire units have made the premeditated, conscious decision to ditch their uniforms and break rank the moment the are ordered to deploy on US soil to maintain the rule of law, contain "rowdy civilians", I wouldn't be surprised if we eventually find them by and by kicking in people's doors and suppressing the "insurgency" through force. I want to be wrong on that one.

But I don't think military would ever be the first choice to be used against citizens. That's what the DHS was made for, whose effective use of domestic intelligence gathering(spying) and Nation-wide coordination of militarized local police forces effectively put out the whole "Occupy" movement. It works!

Now I'm very interested in seeing what goes down around the RNC. That will probably be a little sneakpeek of what we can expect in the treatment of political dissidents in the near future.

[Ron]

My gut feeling is that the government will not have any problems recruiting new folks to take the place of the tiny minority that will refuse to follow orders.

Folks who understand the historical concept of liberty are a minority. I'm speaking about those that actually have a philosophical understanding of liberty as it relates to our founding fathers and of course the advances in our thinking about liberty as it relates to gender and race. Those who actually subscribe to that understanding, believing in natural rights or natural rights being bestowed upon us by our creator are a minority of that minority.

As long as there is enough "bread" and 24/7 "circuses" there will be no great upheaval.

  

[lee n. field]

I'd hardly call Northern Ireland "limited"....but it's a good example of what's to come. Also, considering the damage that hackers like Anonymous can do to electronic infrastructure, future insurrectionists may do even more damage than truck bombs & targeted assasinations.....but those will still happen too.

I'm not looking forward to the next 50 years.....

It is almost certain that I will die sometime in the next 50 years.

[longeyes]

Didn't sound condescending to me, I certainly hope you're right.

I recall seeing a video during Katrina, CA cops in Louisiana - confiscating guns!
I cant recall if the Nat Guard participated or not.

I do however think the LE/military will focus on LA/NYC/SF etc & leave the smaller cities alone if TSHTF  and rural folks will be left to their own resources.

Hmmm, but, I'm wondering, aren't the "smaller cities...and rural folks" more likely to be the ones who are "anti-government?"  Would they, being gunowners and more independent of thought, be the likely targets of central government oppression?

[dm1333]

The military would attack US citizens but I'm hoping that after awhile they would realize they are on the wrong side.

Speaking as a member of the military, no!

Mrs. Smith, I've met more than a few armed NOAA Fisheries agents, or whatever they are calling themselves this week.  They need a gun as much as any regular patrol officer, especiallly when you consider how far away their back up might be.

Blakenzy,  I'm in the Coast Guard, which falls under DHS.  I think you would have a very hard time convincing the CG and the Border Patrol to engage in anything like you are suggesting.

[MrsSmith]

dm1333 - I would think that any criminal issues that might come up at sea would fall under the jurisdiction of the CG, Navy, or DEA rather than Fisheries. That is so NOT in their mandate, nor do I believe it should be. What are they patrolling? Folks taking redfish out of season? This is a shooting offense? HELL NO! This is a misdemeanor punishable by fines. You Coasties are the ones to call for anything bigger than that.

But I also see this as being yet another example of big government getting bigger and taking on more authority over civilians. Next thing you know, mail carriers, Social Security employees, and FDA inspectors will all be armed as well and you'll risk getting a bullet in your head for not putting up the flag when you have mail to be picked up. When did it become acceptable for bureaucratic, non-military, government agencies to bear arms against civilians? This is NOT acceptable.

It's gotten out of control and shows no signs of slowing down or stopping. Show me a government in the history of the world that has ceded authority back to the citizenry.   

[kgbsquirrel]

Not to bring some common sense into this thing or anything, but why shouldn't fisheries guys be armed? As I understand it they operate out in wild areas, and I personally would rather not get turned into an all-you-can-eat buffet for a bear or mountain lion, or hell, even an overly aggressive shark that you accidentally landed when trying to take a sample of a particular fish. Then for the guys operating on high seas in and about the coasts there's of course the ever-present issue of small-scale piracy which despite popular belief is still an issue in areas like the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico.

Those are places I wouldn't go unarmed and I wont demand someone else do so just because of their employment.

[seeker_two]

Discussed this last night on a podcast chat board.....

 http://sqrpt.com/2012/08/16/squirrel-report-22/

Question is....what Fed agencies should have arms for enforcement duties and which ones should have to get local LEO support? Of the civilian Fed agencies, only the FBI & US Marshals Service really should be armed (maybe Coast Guard, if you consider that a civilian agency). Put POTUS security under the Marshals Service where it used to be. All the others should have to get state & local LEO support.

That should work...for a start.