• Shapillon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Or a revolution ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

      (agreed we’re not there but that’s another use of civilians owning warfare weapons)

      • Kage520@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s exactly the argument that conservatives always give for gun ownership. But like, how would they possibly overrun the largest military in the world with their personal arsenals?

        Maybe they could take a city but I can’t see it being a long lasting victory.

        • Uncaged_Jay@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          If anything, the US’s engagements in Vietnam and, more recently, the Middle East have shown that eradicating an insurgent force is incredibly difficult, to the point of being almost impossible. On top of that, there are weapons used during the GWOT that wouldn’t (shouldn’t(?)) Be used against American citizens, unless their goal is to be rulers of the ashes. On top of that, there are plenty of American Servicemembers that would straight up refuse to attack American citizens, and would potentially aid the insurgency with things like vehicles and ammo.

          Add on top of that the extensive gun culture and sheer number of veterans in the general US population and I’d say they have a fighting chance.

          I say this all as a former military intelligence analyst myself.