Just a sample of the Echomail archive
Cooperative anarchy at its finest, still active today. Darkrealms is the Zone 1 Hub.
|    DEBATE    |    Enjoy opinions shoved down your throat    |    4,105 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 3,732 of 4,105    |
|    Tim Richardson to BOB ACKLEY    |
|    Re: obamas gun fight    |
|    16 Jan 16 16:59:47    |
       > > TR>>> American citizens the right to keep and bear arms was to keep an        > > TR>>> armed citizenry able to resist and overthrow a tyrannical        > > TR>>> government.               > > ak>> Small arms is useless for that purpose.        > > TR> What makes you think all we've got is `small arms'?                > > If the army use tanks, bombers, satellite, drones, spying equipment         > > where can buy it? If you catch a tank it will be destroyed by a bomber        > > withing minutes.               Not to mention the military members being `family' of those the government       would want to be suppressing. A look at the expressions on the nation's       military commanders faces as Hussein delivered his `state of his own self'       address the other night pretty much says it; a tyrant of his stripe would       have little control over the nation's military should the citizenry at large       start a popular revolt to restore the full governance of our Constitution       as it was intended by the Founders. Much of what Hussein boasted of in a       military `accomplishment' vein got scornful, `what has he been smoking'       looks from the military leaders.                       > Tanks and bombers are pretty much useless in an urban environment - unless        > the government wants to alienate the rest of the people. They're pretty        > much useless in jungles and forests, too. We should have learned that in        > Vietnam and you should have learn ed it in Afghanistan.               The APC's of the armored Cav units did pretty good in the highlands and on       roads. I saw M1 tanks there, but no huge armored units like in WWII. Mostly       it would be two or three M1's securing a bridge complex, or for patrolling       Highway 1 in hot spots that didn't involve heavy natural cover or many       villages. Very rarely saw more than a few I one place. Armored divisions       were there, but actual `tank' battles didn't happen.               > Small arms, however, are very useful in such an environment. So are knives        > and garrots.                Well-aimed gallon containers with gasoline in them are perfect for taking out       an APC loaded with troops. A 30 06 round from 400 yards does a perfect job       as well. Most American hunters are well up on their shooting skills with a       rifle.                 > > If a person hasn't been in a mental hospital during his life it doesn't        > > mean he is healthy mentally. That is the way how nutcases acquire        > > submachine guns.                > Submachine guns and "assault rifles" are just bullet hoses. They are        > notoriously inaccurate.               Were I to have a choice of weapon I'd take the M14 over the M16 or anything       they've got along those lines now-a-days.        The M-14 I had in my Vietnam unit had a selector switch for semi or full       automatic. We went to a range on post at Chu Lai regularly with our weapons,       and I felt comfortable with what I had.                 > An experienced shooter can do far more damage -        > from a much greater distance - with a scoped big game rifle, and have        > little "collateral damage."              Open sights with a `peep-sight-front-blade' system isn't too shabby, either.       On the range in Basic I could knock down silhouette targets at 350 with an       M-14 lying in a prone position.                > > TR> The vast majority of people this president is referring to when he        > > TR> accuses us of `clinging to God and our guns' are just as        > > TR> responsible and experienced with firearms as I try to be.               > > But anyway, allowing school teachers to have guns is a bad idea. ;=)                > A century and a half ago in this country it was quite common for students -        > ages 10 to 13 - in rural schools to carry pistols to and from school. Yet        > there was none of the mayhem then that there is now               A mass shooting at a school would have been unheard of. Not even a danger.       --- SBBSecho 2.27-Win32        * Origin: Telnet://valhalla.synchro.net - Richmond, Virginia (1:275/93)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca