I saw this thread:
This is where the argument falls apart for pro-Gun folks who claim the 2A protects against tyrannical govt
1) the govt spends nearly $800bn on its military. Your AR-15 is a pea shooter compared to this M1
2) So should we have the right to bear Javelins and RPGs? pic.twitter.com/gIpHlrUAJO
— Acai Prophet (@acaiprophet) May 26, 2022
If you truly believe the 2nd amendment is relevant for the modern era, then ppl should be allowed to bear arms, include modern weaponry to defend against govt
If you think it’s appropriate for us to live in a world where ppl can walk around like it’s Black Hawk Down Mogadishu.. pic.twitter.com/VQ3oVLj779
— Acai Prophet (@acaiprophet) May 26, 2022
Could you imagine if we took this argument to reality?
Some demented soul would buy a RPG, take it to [name any public gathering] and end up committing a horrific crime
Ted Cruz and Greg Abbot would be clamoring that we should provide defense systems against explosive weapons
— Acai Prophet (@acaiprophet) May 26, 2022
There are some people dumb people out there in the world who believe the Viet Cong and The Taliban defeated USA/Rus with only small arms
False
You all keep proving my point https://t.co/OR5fs7AZOn pic.twitter.com/z2B2kw8HRP
— Acai Prophet (@acaiprophet) May 28, 2022
I’ve addressed in other posts why the “your AR-15 vs our tank so the 2A isn’t valid against government tyranny” is wrong.
But this thread is particularly stupid circular logic.
You can’t defend yourself against tyranny because you can’t have a rocket launchers because rocket launchers are bad so you shouldn’t have an AR.
I’m going to go the other way on this.
Remember when the government of Venezuela caused a famine with its bad fiscal policy and when people protested the government ran them over with armored personnel carriers.
That right there is why it should be legal to own anti-tank rocket launchers.
(Arguably, if you could afford one, a rocket launcher is legal as an NFA item.)
Given the current administration’s bad fiscal policy resulting in food shortages…
Rather than this being an argument against the AR-15, it’s an argument to let citizens buy antitank weapons.
I’ll take an M4 Carl Gustaf please.
Heck, we should be able to own M1s with non-demilled weapons systems.
.
The local range would probably have to increase the annual dues… Eh, it’d be worth it.
and I will second on wanting a carl gustaf. was part of the group testing them back in 78 or so. very nice weapon !
not sure if they still offer all the types of shells/rounds as they had back then. it did make the 90mm recoilless rifle we had/carried look like cheap crap. the marines officers there fired and asked questions about it, the army guys couldn’t care less
they had dragons on the mind. I learned to respect marine officers a lot more than army ones that day.
there was a sub caliber training round that was reloadable, forget what it took, I am thinking a 7.62 by 51 round. but I not sure anymore.
The Carl Gustaf is relatively inexpensive compared to the ATGMs.
It’s only around $20k vs $350k for a Javelin+CLU.
And the ammunition is a bargain at between $500-2k a round.
Also the one shot AT4 just $2k each.
The biggest problem with the Carl Gustaf and other recoilless launchers is the overpressure caused concussions and brain injuries.
The US Army limits the amount of shots per day to three with PPE of helmets & armor. The effect can last as long as 96hrs.
Mount them on vehicles and fire them remotely…. I never engage people in these “arguments “.. its a waste of time
And…
How exactly does my ownership and use of a RPG, a Gustaf, and APC, a Tank, a nuclear bomb, whatever… matter to you in any way as long as I use it in a law abiding and responsible manner?
The original Twit apparently forgot there is such a thing as a Molotov Cocktail, invented by the Finns for this exact application. Even with today’s gas prices you can make one for a few dollars.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again:
You don’t have to DESTROY a tank to DEFEAT a tank.
I know WWII tanks had to be careful with wooded areas, because sticks, branches, stumps, etc. could loosen the tracks enough for them to come off. Modern track designs might be better, but I bet they’re not immune.
Anyone ever read “Footfall”? There’s a scene where they borrow a trick from the Czech uprising to immobilize an armored vehicle. Cost a few dollars in material.
The stack of cops, 20 deep, hiding in the school hallway, wearing class 4 body armor and carrying ballistic shields, scared of a single 18 year old man-child tranny who’s had a rifle less than a week and has no combat training or firearms practice. That image right there puts the lie to his entire line of logic and reason.
So who the hell do the lib-tards think is going to go door to door, seizing weapons from 50+ year old men who budget 3 figures or more for monthly training ammo? Who may or may not have military training. Who have “deer rifles” that can meet MOA accuracy out to 500 yds. Who have AR’s in multiple flavors. Our biggest question, the thing that will mostly delay our response, is which rifle to grab when you see SWAT teams going door-to-door in your neighborhood. Who the F is going to come to our door and seize our weapons when they piss their pants the first time they face incoming fire.
Not to Fed-poast, cause I genuinely never want to see CW 2.0, but anytime some whackjob suggests that we can’t face the entire govt, they should imagine the Uvaldi PD being the ones sent out to seize our weapons. That’ll turn out well
Those officers will be at home guarding their families if things go too pear-shaped. The smart ones will group up so they can take shifts. The smartest ones will beat feet or turn coat.
So let me get this straight…….
Your AR15 is no match for the US dot.mil with tanks, machine guns, F-15s, and even “noooks”, so it’s pointless to resist because “reasons”; however, the AR15 is a such a fearsome “weapon of war” that’s sooooo dangerous you citizens can’t have them.
If my AR15 and other assorted small arms are no match, ever, in a gazillion years, against the .gov, WHY ARE THEY AFRAID???? Is it me, or does the anti-2A crowd not see the failure in this argument?
I swear, I think that crowd watches old videos of Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968, and Beijing/Tiananmen 1989 like it’s Swedish porn. The thought of crushing fellow American citizens makes their private parts tingle.
What they should be watching is the Nicolae and Elena Ceaușescu video after their trial in 1989 Romania. Just trying to help everyone understand the concept of “consequences”.
Semper Fi!
Tank kill=fuel/resupply kill. =personnel kill (they hafta take a leak/dump sometime). =mobility kill due to all the debris in the roadway. Etcetera.
And, I’m simply a dumb old far white guy, never done any .mil time.
Imagine what some smart guy with time downrange might think up.
Twit.
Flip side of the what are gonna do against an apache helicopter with your at 15 argument is. OK if it poses so little threat, why does it need to be regulated?
Why are all this person’s pictures of scary armed people dark-skinned?
And I have news for him — the cartels and bigger/older street gangs certainly have stashes of RPGs and the like they’ve stockpiled. Qaddafi, for one, was open about arming US gangs.