Advertisements

2020 Dem gun grabbers, beware: At least 650,000 ticked off, armed American rebels await your confiscation

By J. D. Heyes

Because they are big government statists, at least two Democrats running for their party’s 2020 presidential nomination have indicated they would support legislation that would potentially require federal authorities to confiscate at least certain classes of firearms.

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), the original “Russian collusion” truther, made an asinine statement last fall on Twitter in response to someone who claimed there’d be a massive fight if Uncle Sam ever got into the gun confiscation business. 

As noted in a November analysis by Larry Correia at Monster Hunter Nation:

He got into a debate about gun control, suggested a mandatory buyback—which is basically confiscation with a happy face sticker on it—and when someone told him that they would resist, he said resistance was futile because the government has nukes.

Swalwell walked back his tweet later, but his message was clear: All-powerful and well-armed, the U.S. government would quickly dispatch any ne’er-do-wells who refused to comply with a gun confiscation edict, the Second Amendment be damned.

Fast-forward to the present. In recent days, Sen. Cory “Spartacus” Booker of New Jersey published a gun control plan in which he claimed he would “fight” the NRA like never before (despite the fact that the NRA has never condoned nor called for gun violence or had one of its members shoot someplace up).

Essentially, what Booker is proposing as a means of rejuvenating his already-flagging campaign is a federal effort to curb your right to keep and bear arms including a ban on certain classes of guns (you guessed it — military-looking “assault” rifles) and universal gun registration. Presumably, if he ever got his plan through Congress and signed into law, like Swalwell’s plan it would include an ‘enforcement’ provision.

Confiscation.

And that’s when the real violence would begin, according to Correia’s analysis.

“First, let’s talk about the basic premise that an irregular force primarily armed with rifles would be helpless against a powerful army that has things like drones and attack helicopters,” he writes. “This is a deeply ironic argument to make, considering that the most technologically advanced military coalition in history has spent the better part of the last two decades fighting goat herders with AKs in Afghanistan and Iraq.”

Essentially, Correia notes that despite the infusion of, at one point about 100,000 NATO and U.S. troops in Afghanistan and tens of thousands in Iraq, ‘irregular’ — another term is “rebel” or “guerrilla” — forces have managed to stick around for years despite the overwhelming technical/military advantage possessed by the United States and Western militaries.

Part of that is due to rules of engagement: We are no longer ‘permitted,’ via international law, to bomb cities and civilian populations into oblivion. But part of this is also because irregular forces fight asymmetrically — hit-and-run tactics, ambushes, etc. — instead of traditional force-on-force combat.

But overall, these forces are few; perhaps only as many as 15,000-20,000, tops. And yet, they continue to exist, armed only with rifles and light weapons:

Best estimates are that any given time in Iraq we’ve been fighting about 20,000 insurgents at most. Keep that number in mind, because now we’re going to talk about the scope of this hypothetical fight over gun control.

If all bets were off and the U.S. government, under some tyrannical (Democrat) president and Congress, began military and paramilitary operations against non-compliant gun owners, Correia estimates very conservatively that there would be at least 650,000 American “insurgents” and “rebels” for the government to have to deal with. And these would be hard-core, fight-to-the-death constitutionalists who simply would not bend to the government’s will.

Keeping in mind that even an authoritarian Democrat is not going to order the U.S. military to level an American city, how would he/she expect to deal with an insurgency/rebellion/guerrilla force this large when we can’t even defeat one that is less than a tenth as big overseas?

Correia surmises:

Okay, so let’s say Congressman Swalwell gets his wish, and the government says turn them in or else. And even though the government has become tyrannical enough to send SWAT teams door to door and threaten citizens with drones and attack helicopters, rather than half the states saying f**k you, this means Civil War 2, instead we’ll stick to the rosiest of all possible outcomes, and say that most gun owners comply.

In fact, let’s be super kind. Rather than a realistic number, like half or a third of those people getting really, really pissed off and hoisting the black flag, let’s say that 99% of them decide to totally put all their faith into the government, and that the all-powerful entity which just threatened to kill their entire family will never ever turn tyrannical from now on, pinky swear, so what do they have to lose? And a whopping 90% of gun owners go along peacefully.

You Might Like

That means you are only dealing with six and a half MILLION insurgents. The entire active US military is about 1.3 million, with about 800,000 reserve. Which is also assuming that those two Venn diagrams don’t overlap, which is just plain idiotic, but I’ll get to that too.

Let’s be super generous. I’m talking absurdly generous, and say that a full 99% of US gun owners say won’t somebody think of the children and all hold hands and sing kumbaya, so that then you are only dealing with the angriest, listless malcontents who hate progress…  These are those crazy, knuckle dragging bastards who you will have to put in the ground.

And there are 650,000 of them.

To put that into perspective, we were fighting 22,000 insurgents in Iraq, a country which would fit comfortably inside Texas with plenty of room to spare. This would be almost 30 times as many fighters, spread across 22 times the area.

And that estimated number is pathetically, laughably low.

The thing about irregular warfare is that its practitioners, while devoid of high-tech military systems, nonetheless adapt to their situations — just like the dirt farmers and Afghan country boys we’ve been fighting now for, oh, 18 years. They use whatever technology is available to them to their advantage, and generally at a place and time of their choosing.

This is a concept that only Left-wing Democratic arrogance cannot fathom or comprehend.

A version of this story first appeared at NewsTarget.

Be the first to receive our latest video reports: Subscribe to our YouTube Channel by clicking here and pro-liberty video platform Brighteon by clicking here


Advertisements

17 Comments on "2020 Dem gun grabbers, beware: At least 650,000 ticked off, armed American rebels await your confiscation"

  1. Gentlejarhead | May 10, 2019 at 8:58 am | Reply

    You are of course presuming that civilian law enforcement aren’t knuckle draggers too and that significant portions of the military will even carry out those orders.

  2. Their Praetorian guards won’t confiscate when the checks no longer cash and it takes a Weimar Wheelbarrow to get groceries.
    The Deplorables don’t play the helpless snowflake game and we damn sure don’t fear half baked kook statist utopians.

  3. “The thing about irregular warfare is that its practitioners, while devoid of high-tech military systems, nonetheless adapt to their situations — just like the dirt farmers and Afghan country boys we’ve been fighting now for, oh, 18 years. They use whatever technology is available to them to their advantage, and generally at a place and time of their choosing”. I think there are those in the military that understand that too. Getting sniped must really suck. I also think that those in the military realize that the Left eats their own too. Someday those who may follow unConstitutional orders today, will someday in the future, be eaten by those giving the orders today. Eating their own is one of the things that distinguish the Left. They turn on their own all the time.

  4. I am a retired ff/pm. I know a lot of active duty and retired le. and military. The vast, VAST majority are “gun guys”. Many of their fathers, brothers, uncles, cousins friends and even wives and daughters are “gun guys”
    A few of my buddies were Rangers and other SF who specialized in training indigenous groups in shithole 3rd world countries on how to form resistance groups.
    Some of the retired SF guys now teach here in the U.S.
    I suggest everyone reading this take a few classes, and encourage your family and friends to do the same.
    I really think the retards who would outlaw firearms and criminalize gun owners have no f’ing idea what a giant pile of shit they are about to step in.

    • If Trump is not re-elected in 2020 get ready to rumble. Never assume and always be prepared. This battle with the marxist left is never ending. MAGA

  5. well im not ex military i wish i was but im not , what i am is a life long hunter mostly with a bow but i have an AR it is not for hunting its to protect me and mine and im one hell of a good shot i love my country but if the democrats think im going to live under their tyranny they better think again because i would rather die on my feet with a pile of brass around me as to live on my knees

  6. Make that 650,001.

  7. “At least 650,000 ticked off, armed American rebels await your confiscation.”

    650,000? In San Antonio alone, maybe.

  8. Ricardo Phynque | May 10, 2019 at 6:02 pm | Reply

    650,002

  9. There would most likely be more than 650K surrounding DC alone, burning it to the ground and dragging the pelosies by their nadlers out into the streets for execution.

  10. The IRA never had more than 200 fighters at once during their resistance and gave the British pure hell.

  11. These gun grabbers are in for a surprise. There’s a lot of people out there that have plenty of protection and are not afraid to use it. So. Bring it on. It’s time to take out the trash.

  12. William Chan | May 11, 2019 at 6:55 am | Reply

    We are the only country in the world that has a Second Amendment.
    Find one government in all of history that banned it’s own ARMED FORCES from “Keeping and Bearing” ARMS.
    Find one government in the history of humanity that felt a need to document a “RIGHT” for it’s ARMED FORCES to possess ARMS.
    Oppressive Governments are ALWAYS banning the People’S RIGHTS to arms.
    The claim that the Founding Fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment to give Our ARMED FORCES a “right” to keep and carry ARMS is S-T-U-P-I-D.
    The only reason for the Second Amendment is to clearly spell-out the GOD GIVEN RIGHT of INDIVIDUALS to keep & bear ARMS.
    The only reason for the BILL(list) of RIGHTS was to codify INDIVIDUALS’ GOD GIVEN RIGHTS.
    Has there ever been a government that was not chock full of it’s “rights” up to and including declaring itself to be the Lord God Almighty?! (Rome, Egypt, Israel,etc)
    Does the 1st Amendment mean the GOVERNMENT is allowed to give speeches? Try shutting up any Politician. But THEY would LOVE to shut YOU up, hence the FIRST Amendment.
    Anyone who tells you the 2nd Amendment applies to the Army or State Militia, is telling you they think you are STUPID.
    There has NEVER been a government that felt it had to codify it’s army’s/soldier’s “RIGHT” to “Keep and BEAR ARMS” because there has NEVER been a government that refused to allow It’s own soldiers to KEEP and BEAR ARMS!
    The Second Amendment was written for the People, like the other 9 Amendments in the Bill of Rights. This was confirmed by the SCOTUS in the DC vs Heller decision, where they stated that the “People” in the Second Amendment were the same “People” that are mentioned in the First and Fourth Amendment.
    The 2nd Amendment clearly codifies the “right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms”, and certainly not “the Militia”.
    Why would “the Militia”, a type of army manned by citizen-soldiers as opposed to full-time “regulars”, need a constitutional amendment to guarantee they have the right “to keep and bear arms”?
    Is there any specific statement anywhere in the Constitution that the army Congress is empowered to raise has the “right to keep and bear arms”? Of course not. …………. That is assumed.

    the 2nd amendment,, specifies that the RIGHT to bear arms is the right of the people,, NOT the militia,,,, it is the people who will make up the militia,, but the right is not the right of a “well regulated militia” it is the right of the people, We the people were BORN WITH INALIENABLE RIGHTS, meaning they come from GOD.

    Your Rights do not come from the Constitution. Your Rights come from Our Creator, and the Constitution was written to SUPERVISE, REGULATE, and CONTROL government actors. As it relates to firearms, the Heller “decision” was completely unnecessary, and likely a smokescreen to make it APPEAR that the USG retained some rights to regulate some firearms. Check out the relevant part of US v. Cruikshank:
    “[The Right to Keep and Bear Arms] is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed;… This is one of the amendments that has no other effect
    than to restrict the powers of the national government,…”.
    U.S. v. Cruikshank Et Al. 92 U.S. 542 (1875).
    Res adjudicata – “the thing has already been decided.”
    The 9th and 10th Amendments help make it ABUNDANTLY clear to even the DENSEST of intellects that we truly have NO “Constitutional rights.” What we have(at the risk of being redundant) is Constitutionally-SECURED rights, but these rights are ONLY as secure as:
    a) the honor and integrity of those taking the oath, and
    b) the ability of the People to COMPEL obedience on pain of perjury charges and removal from office.

    https://resistancetononsense.wordpress.com/2018/06/29/our-preexisting-irrevolkable-right-of-self-defense/

    The intention of the Founders and Framers was to keep our God-given rights secure by REQUIRING those who seek office to take the oath as an immutable predicate to taking office, meaning it is binding on THEM – not on US.

    Of course, most of the power brokers wish to keep us ignorant of our Rights and our Power. If possible, i highly recommend Thomas Paine’s “The Rights of Man,” which should help to educate Americans and illustrate to them the difference between Natural Rights, and what the 14th (never properly ratified, btw) wishes to change that to: “privileges and immunities.”

    It is implicit in the nature of all kinds of armies —- be they militia or regulars, volunteer, conscripted, or mercenary — to be armed.
    They are all “armed forces”.
    They all “bear arms”.
    They all carry guns.
    That is what they do.
    It certainly no more requires an amendment to the Constitution to state that “the Militia” has the RKBA , than a specific statement that the army Congress is empowered to raise may be manned by armed troops.

    Governments don’t have to document their “right” to bear arms, that is what governments ARE, they are naked force, George Washington said as much. Saying governments have a right to guns is like saying cars have a right to have wheels…

    “The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals … it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government … it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen’s protection against the government.” Ayn Rand

  13. Mr. Pottymouth | May 11, 2019 at 7:31 pm | Reply

    I’ve been preaching something similar for a couple of years now. MANY if not MOST cops & soldiers simply would refuse to disarm us. Why? Because they ARE us. They’re our sons, daughters, moms, dads, neices, nephews… etc. And I think most CO’s know that they couldn’t control a mutinous company and wouldn’t even try because they’re mostly patriots as well. If forced it would fall apart from the ground up.

    We have a better chance than we know but there’s something else…

    • What’s the ”something else”, Mr. Pottymouth ? Would you be suggesting they militarize the iilegal aliens flooding our country ?

  14. Mr. Pottymouth | May 11, 2019 at 7:38 pm | Reply

    5G, V2K, Voice to Skull Technology, Voice of God technology: Research it.
    5G if deployed & tested can subvert us behaviorally, psychologically. A gun ain’t doing me any good if they’ve scrambled my brains. THAT’s what I’m afraid of.
    I’m not suggesting that, granted knowledge of V2K, you’d all just drop your weapons because a voice in your head told you to, (as have soldiers when hit with it). But it IS in line with Active Denial weaponry which they state is “non lethal” yet can be dialed up to lethal levels if desired. It can cook a human in the skin. Some Democrats swear it keeps our children moist & locks in the natural flavor & juices.

    I don’t fear the soldiers much. I’m terrified of the bio/cyber/psychological weapons.

    • Oops ! Didn’t see your other comment here, Mr. Pottymouth. OK, now your scaring me. But yes, Silicon Valley is freedom’s greatest threat today. Google, Ray Kurzweil and that whole cabal of godless maniacal techno freaks are very dangerous people. Control freaks drunk on power. Some call them ” Masters of the Universe ”. What does the future hold for our great nation ?

Have something to say?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: