Could one sane person please explain to me how loosing an armed citizenry would strengthen our national defense from...

Could one sane person please explain to me how loosing an armed citizenry would strengthen our national defense from foreign invaders? Also, wasn’t American independence made possible (in part) by not relying on the government to protect us.? Don’t side-track just answer the fucking question.
>Pro tip you can’t.

Attached: gun merica!.jpg (355x142, 6K)

I don't think I've ever heard someone who is in favor of gun control try to argue that it would strengthen national defense against foreign invaders.

because so far it looks like around 400 million gun owners are currently in america
thats several times bigger than our own military, or a lot of militaries out there
look at vietnam, but imagine middle class people with good guns, patriotism, and good communication
gud luk

Attached: 1560309807742.jpg (539x960, 43K)

because they can't. doge and deflect

oh nvm you meant loosing an armed citizenry

>foreign invaders
that's where you're dreaming. what fucking invaders?

More people alive, and i thought it was the government forcing people to protect them.

That's like demanding someone who wants to clear timberland to build a shopping mall explain how the mall will produce more timber.

exactly, they're too scared of our freedom
look at japan, how to get nuked 101

I don’t understand how that answered either of my questions. Could you please break it down barney style for me

We could never fight against the military... Drones, tanks, etc.

The military could never effectively control an armed citizenry. Destroy yes. Control no.

what fucking invaders... said almost every country that has been invaded

No country on earth could invade the US. Our military is hilariously overpowered.

see

Yea when has guerrilla warfare worked in the last 200 years??

Honestly, that holds some merit. However, you cant rule it out 110%. my original point being that an armed citizenry serves as a deterrent

Retard detected.
The PAVN and NLF were fanatically dedicated nationalists.
Hard men who grew up eating shit and tiny amounts of rice.
Aside from being supplied with hardcore military equipment like jets and MANPADS from the Soviets, they were highly organized and had a command structure.
Fat americans with no knowledge of doctrine nor ability to adhere to a chain of command would be mowed down and that's if they managed to find the guts to fight at all.
They're too busy watching reality TV to fight for their freedoms.

are you serious?

Some libs think the people couldn't beat the military anyway, so there's no the people having their own guns...all despite the fact that was exactly what happened in the Revolution. The People fought, loyal military people switched sides to help the Revolutionists, and the "military" was so routed, their General Cornwallis couldn't bring himself to personally surrender his sword to Gen. George Washington, and had a subordinate officer do it. Washington for some reason gave the fucking sword back, so allegedly it sits in Buckingham Palace til this day, instead of being paraded around in the streets of Washington every Independence Day...Anyway, libs think fucking everyone's rights will reduce school and public place shootings.

Some call the invaders “migrants”

1) no one is arguing that more guns makes occupation by an invading force more difficult - they do

2) the argument is that we are not risk of being invaded and occupied; no military or even military alliance in the world can invade the US

3) taking invasion/occupation off the table, you are still left with the possibility of WMD attack; guns do nothing to prevent this

4) so how about using guns for defense against our (the US) government? citizens owning guns does not make this any more or less likely; what does make it more or less likely is the system of checks and balances and structure of our military (even if some units support a takeover others would oppose it)

5) the federal government has made exactly zero attempts to seize guns en masse

5) what about protecting other citizens? deaths and injuries from guns, even legally owned/purchased ones, are an epidemic - in most areas far greater than the risk of violent crime; plus we have responsive police departments

6) what about owning a gun for recreation or home security? you should be able to, but if that's the case it should be registered including with ballistic testing (little risk of government attempt to seize based on ownership, see above)

That's not even remotely close.

There is no chance you will ever get our guns, commie.

Attached: All Souls.jpg (480x480, 77K)

I'm pro-gun, but fuck you and your loaded ass question

Loosing it wouldn't, look at switzerland, never invaded probably in a big part to the massive amount of armed civvies

We're not in danger from foreign invaders anymore. At least not in any way that randos with guns can defend against.

It's exactly analogous.