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


Trending Politics

17
Leave a Reply

avatar
14 Comment threads
3 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread

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

  Subscribe  
Notify of
Gentlejarhead
Guest
Gentlejarhead

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.

Defiance
Guest
Defiance

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.

bobjones77
Guest

“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,… Read more »

retfire
Guest
retfire

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… Read more »

pat Halk
Guest
pat Halk

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

Chuck C
Guest

Make that 650,001.

Alex Fitch
Guest
Alex Fitch

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

650,000? In San Antonio alone, maybe.

Ricardo Phynque
Guest
Ricardo Phynque

650,002

JD
Guest
JD

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.

Note Worthy
Guest
Note Worthy

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

YouKnowWho
Guest
YouKnowWho

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.

William Chan
Guest
William Chan

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… Read more »

Mr. Pottymouth
Guest
Mr. Pottymouth

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…

Mr. Pottymouth
Guest
Mr. Pottymouth

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… Read more »

%d bloggers like this: