Naval Reservist + LAPD = TerminatorNot much training at all? He was a naval reservist and a police officer. He may not be a former member of Seal Team 10, but it's a bit of a stretch to call him an ordinary civilian. He's hardly a good counterpoint to that argument, even if that argument is profoundly ignorant.
Killing a few cops with an ambush and then going into hiding is hardly standing up to the government.Earlier in this thread we had people laughing at the idea that civilians with guns could in any way stand up against the government (in the context of the 2nd amendment being the last guarantee of our rights).
I just find that funny now given how essentially one "civilian" (not much training at all) has managed to flummox the entire LA PD. If the examples of insurgents around the globe wasn't enough of one, now you have one right at home. The only thign the heavily armed police forces have managed to do is shoot up civilians and make it even harder to find people. Now imagine all this happening largescale in a much more hostile environment to police forces and the government.
Guerrilla warfare is exactly that. No one thinks abunch of civilians armed are going to resist the government by lining up and shooting at cops/military like they are redcoats.Killing a few cops with an ambush and then going into hiding is hardly standing up to the government.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymmetric_warfareKilling a few cops with an ambush and then going into hiding is hardly standing up to the government.
Guerrilla warfare usually only works against outsiders. I don't know any modern day examples of the people overthrowing their government with guerrilla warfare, especially a government with a military as technologically advanced as the U.S., absent outside help. You seem to have some perverse admiration of this guy, but make no mistake, he'll end up in a body bag in a few days.Guerrilla warfare is exactly that. No one thinks abunch of civilians armed are going to resist the government by lining up and shooting at cops/military like they are redcoats.
I hope he does end up in a bodybag. Especially before the LA PD manages to shoot up any more civilians hunting for him.You seem to have some perverse admiration of this guy, but make no mistake, he'll end up in a body bag in a few days.
You probably didn't mean to, but your post heavily implied that he was "standing up" to the government. I'm not sure how, but you twisted the fact that a murderous lunatic was killing cops with guns into a support of having more guns. Kudos.I hope he does end up in a bodybag. Especially before the LA PD manages to shoot up any more civilians hunting for him.
I also don't have any perserve admiration for him, well, at least only in the "holy shit can the LA PD be any more incompetent?" vein.
Only works against outsiders? That's because you only resort to guerrilla warfare when you're attacked by a superior force. And you don't try and win the whole war with guerrilla warfare, the point is to keep your forces intact and operational while you rally more supporters to your cause. You're also causing a conflict of interest for the rank and file of the military, who are comprised of ordinary men and women just like the guerrillas.Guerrilla warfare usually only works against outsiders. I don't know any modern day examples of the people overthrowing their government with guerrilla warfare, especially a government with a military as technologically advanced as the U.S., absent outside help. You seem to have some perverse admiration of this guy, but make no mistake, he'll end up in a body bag in a few days.
No, it only works against outsiders, because it only works against outsiders. All the examples of effective guerrilla warfare, from the revolution, to vietnam, to Iraq, consisted of a guerrilla force that fought against a foreign invader. The guerrillas had a substantial home field advantage, including a superior understanding of the terrain, native cultural norms, and language, and thise allowed them to resist against a supperior force. But none of those advantages would be all that useful when the force they are resisting is their own government.Only works against outsiders? That's because you only resort to guerrilla warfare when you're attacked by a superior force. And you don't try and win the whole war with guerrilla warfare, the point is to keep your forces intact and operational while you rally more supporters to your cause. You're also causing a conflict of interest for the rank and file of the military, who are comprised of ordinary men and women just like the guerrillas.
Maybe the reason why it seems so ridiculous or unthinkable to you is because the US is still a LONG way away from the point of having a serious uprising against the government that consisted of ordinary citizens and not just militia whackjobs. A lot can change in 10-20 years.
This guy is a ex-cop murderous lunatic. So the one thing we can be fairly sure of is that any sort of gun control would have had zero effect on this particular killing. He would have had access to guns regardless.I'm not sure how, but you twisted the fact that a murderous lunatic was killing cops with guns into a support of having more guns. Kudos.
Thank you for validating me bringing this guy up as an example.No, it only works against outsiders, because it only works against outsiders.
Re-read my statement. Read it, think about what I'm saying, then, if you still think I'm wrong and you want to prove that I am wrong, feel free to give me examples that discount my statement. Right now I don't think I said what you think I said.Thank you for validating me bringing this guy up as an example.
You are really, right on this board, saying that guerilla forces have never overthrown their own governments? Read some fucking history, not just US history.
edit: Also of course, in a situation in 10-20 years where the government turned tyrannical, the odds are at that point that some outside forces would be supporting anyone fighting against such a government.