The idea of a massed, forcible confiscation of guns has been kicked around here in these virtual pages. It’s entertaining brain-fodder, as certainly a significant proportion of gun owners would not comply. Here, from author and pro-gunner Larry Correia, is one of the better dissections of this issue I’ve seen to date. A few excerpts follow, with my comments.
So today I’m writing this for my left leaning friends and readers, in the hopes that I can break down the flaws in this argument. I’m going to try not to be too insulting. Accent on try… But I’ll probably fail because this is a really stupid argument.
So, bear in mind, Mr. Correia is directing the comments that follow to the would-be gun-banners.
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.
Like, say, the Viet Cong.
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. Seriously, it’s like you guys only pay attention to American casualties when there’s a republican in office and an election coming up.
Nobel Peace Prize Winner Barack Obama launched over five hundred drone strikes during his eight years in office. We’ve used Apaches (that’s the scary looking helicopter in the picture for my peacenik liberal friends), smart bombs, tanks, I don’t know how many thousand s of raids on houses and compounds, all the stuff that the lefty memes say they’re willing to do to crush the gun nut right, and we’ve spent something like 6 trillion dollars on the global war on terror so far.
And yet they’re still fighting.
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.
But here’s the real kicker, when it comes to how just a small percentage of the population – with the help, almost certainly, of a not-insignificant portion of the military and police – could do a lot with a little to fuck things up for everybody:
The scariest single conversation I’ve ever heard in my life was five Special Forces guys having a fun thought exercise about how they would bring a major American city to its knees. They picked Chicago, because it was a place they’d all been. It was fascinating, and utterly terrifying. And I’ll never ever put any of it in a book, because I don’t want to give crazy people any ideas. Give it about a week and people would be eating each other (and gee whiz, take one wild guess what the political leanings of most Green Berets are?).
Similar dinner conversation once, with a bunch of SWAT cops from a major American city, talking about how incredibly easy it would be to entirely shut down and utterly ruin their city, with only a small crew of dedicated individuals and about forty eight hours of mayhem and fuckery. (And guess what their political leanings were? Hint, most of them were eager to retire because they’d been treated like shit by their liberal mayors, and take their pension to someplace like Arkansas).
Read the whole thing, by all means. Now, don’t think for a moment that the gun-ban advocates haven’t thought of these things as well; if they have three IQ points to rub together they’d have to know what kind of hell they’d be unleashing by even trying.
But there are other ways to deal gun owners a death of a thousand cuts, and you’re seeing some of those in the works now. Like the “red flag” proposals, which give local law enforcement the power to confiscate guns by force from anyone who they have reason to believe presents some danger – anyone think that this will never be abused? Anyone worried about enabling government at any level to strip someone of a Constitutionally recognized natural right based on hearsay?
How about a punitive tax on ammo, powder and primers? Gun-banners have already started talking about going after ammo – after all, guns aren’t much use without ammo – and hell, they wouldn’t have to ban ammo, all they would have to do is find a way to make it horribly expensive to make primers.
There are easily a thousand ways to tax, regulate and annoy the gun-owning population to the point where a fair number of them will just give it up as a bad job. That will dry up the pool of people who care about the Second Amendment, which will allow for even more onerous regulation and legislation…
…See where I’m headed with this? I’d almost rather they try to just ban guns outright. At least then we’d get the damn thing over with quickly.