National The World’s Largest Army?

[bbbass]

Yadda, yadda, yadda, can't do this or won't do that... this Memorial Day just remember what the Imperial Japanese found out when they woke the sleeping giant. Also remember the short time it took to whip the Militia into an effective fighting force that often used guerilla tactics against British standing army. And remember what a bunch of farmers in black pajama were able to do to us. And what the Afghans did to the Russians.

Then there's the aspect of numbers over quality... overwhelm them with sheer numbers. Please stop telling me that hunters and fatboys can't/won't fight. Defending one's home is a survival imperative. I think that Japan generals had the right idea.

(BTW: Japan attacked Pearl to prevent us from stopping their moves on the nations of the Pacific Ocean and China. They had no intention ever of invading us. But they thought they needed to expand to ensure the survival of their island nation, and we might have stood in their way since we were already making plans in places such as Wake Island. And besides, the rest of the world was considered by the Japanese to be barbarians, less than human.)

Ah crud, the OP is just a bit of humorous conjecture anyway. I found it entertaining. Ya'll calm down. Nobody's invading except the people that walk across the Southern border. Let's all go Wolverine on those bastids!!!

 

[The Heretic]

I don't know that they are an 'army'. Especially considering that today's army is a lot better trained and equipped than during WWII or any time in the past for that matter.

That said, an armed populace is a formidable force if for no other reason than they will look like any other civilian, and there are so many of them - even though I doubt that more than 10% would actively engage an opposing force, it would still be a force that would hugely outnumber any formal military force.

 

[rupey7]

No matter how you slice or dice it I'd rather be here, in the armed US than an unarmed European country.

 

[civilian75]

Yeap, we had all the guns. That's why they did not come at us through the front door. They slithered in thru the crevices found in our freedoms protected by our Constitution. The enemy is no longer at the gates, the enemy has the keys to the gates!

 

[rupey7]

If the enemy comes through my gate he will find a nice surprise waiting on the other side!

 

[TTSX]

I think the problem, if there is one, is that even though we are millions, we're generally very spread out and not well coordinated. Though I do like that my countrymen are well armed

 

[2A2Dend]

Internet Bravado.
Move along.
Nothing to see here.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Have posted this before. Just by the numbers; 1 to 2 million, active service military with reservists and national guard versus
A minimum of 1 million to 3 million civilian gun owners, the majority who are trained veterans, former LEOs, or currently LEOs;

And then theres the support network needed for both...

How much support for the civilian "guerillas" do you think there could be, against a tyrannical standing army/air force? Remember, they gotta get fuel, ammunition, water, food, and other supplies somehow..

Now tactics.

Control the infrastructure, control the movement of whoever.

Control the airspace, but without the ability to deliver fuel by road, theyre stuck to airlifting or shipping fuel and weaponry via the seas..

Who works in the arsenals and such for the Feds? Civilians by and large.. a massive strike, walk out, or takeover of production facilities would cripple the military pretty easily.

Power substations. Here again, is another weak point.

Politically, it would be absolute suicide to disregard Posse Comitus laws and to basically declare war upon fellow Americans... even with the help of media and the UN

The reason for the 2A is to remind the Government that it could cost them dearly if the government goes against the People.

 

[The Heretic]

Politically, it would be absolute suicide to disregard Posse Comitus laws and to basically declare war upon fellow Americans... even with the help of media and the UN

The reason for the 2A is to remind the Government that it could cost them dearly if the government goes against the People.

The only problem is that gun owners are a minority. without support of a significant portion of the populace, any rebellion would flounder and eventually fail.

 

[CamoDeafie]

The only problem is that gun owners are a minority. without support of a significant portion of the populace, any rebellion would flounder and eventually fail.

A slim minority. 43% of households surveyed had at least 1 gun in household (and we all know just how reluctant many gun owners are towards admitting that they are gun owners to survey takers )

Gun ownership in the U.S. 1972-2018 | Statistic

Thats easily 140 million gun owners. Estimating 1 in 3 to 1 in 2 as gun owners? Between 100 to 150 million ish.

And how many of those have families, cousins, communities supporting them...

Consider veterans and blue line supporters... and also consider that the vast majority of anti gunners live in the large urban centers.. this means rural communities are the more well armed populace too. As I've alluded to, I do not believe more than a million gun owners spread out in 48 continental states (Hawaii and Alaska are gonna be hard to support from CONUS, though Alaska may be well off by being isolated relatively..) have the brass balls to stand and fight if necessary although there are claims that there would be a much larger number.

It is academic, but important to discuss... the LEAs? Sheriff departments versus city/State/Fed police forces? How many communities do you think would go in support of their County Sheriff deptartments if these depts declare that Fed and State LEOs don't have jurisdiction to take guns away or to allow military intervention?

We are in essentially a cold war of idealogues; will it ever turn hot?.I certainly hope not.

 

[The Heretic]

It is indeed academic. I have somewhere in a law journal an article some retired colonel (IIRC) wrote about the very subject; what it would take to support a rebellion in the USA.

My back of napkin estimate of gun owners is that we are about one third of the population, and only about 20% of those are serious gun owners (e.g., ones who would frequent this forum), the other 80% being owners who have maybe one or two guns - such as a hunting rifle or shotgun, or a home defense handgun they bought, shot once and locked away for emergencies.

I base that assertion on the Pareto Principle (80/20 rule) and studies (such as Meet America's Gun Super-Owners — With An Average of 17 Firearms Each ).

Of those 20%, how many are fit enough to engage a trained government military? Of those, how many would be willing?

Not many. I think they would still outnumber the any country's military, but not by the numbers a lot of people assume.

 

[Black Dog]

One thing I have not seen yet is, Do not think the Military personal would not be divided. I think a lot of them would not fight and support the people. Ask a few and see what they say. They are also loosing their rights along with us when they get out. YOU CAN NOT WIN A WAR WHEN ONE SIDE DOES NOT WEAR A UNIFORM! This Government has not learned this.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Not to be too much of a "wet blanket" here but...I will anyway...

An Army requires training and discipline...otherwise its just an armed mob...
Discipline requires a unifying of thought and direction...

With that in mind :
How many threads and posts , on just this forum , have caused discord and divisiveness among us...?

If we as gun owners have trouble agreeing to a thought , opinion or other discussion of a gun related topic , posted online...then just how are we supposed to be a Army...?
Andy

 

[Member 5605]

After spending many times at a hunter sight in day helping these supposed "hunters" sight in rifles.

I wouldn't be afraid, here is why:

• 30% are mouth breathers
• 20% are on government living
• 60% only have one or two boxes of ammo because that's all they have needed in the last 25 years. They keep loading and unloading the same rounds at the end of season.
• 50% don't hunt with the same grain of bullet they brought out thinking it's zeroed for one, good for all.
• 75% trust the kid at BiMart for a boresight that should get them on paper or within 2" of bullseye.
• 50% think poly tipped will shoot the same as a round nose.
• 90% flinch before pulling the trigger and have their eyes closed before recoil hits them

 

[Howard1955]

How many threads and posts , on just this forum , have caused discord and divisiveness among us...?

If we as gun owners have trouble agreeing to a thought , opinion or other discussion of a gun related topic , posted online...then just how are we supposed to be a Army...?
Andy

I think it would take an existential threat to the nation to make us stop bickering - and start organizing & fighting a common enemy.

An invading army would probably be a catalyst to bring us together. A complete societal collapse could have a similar effect, since we would either work together to survive, or perish.

I'm reminded of President Reagan's comments:

 

[GWS]

Not to be too much of a "wet blanket" here but...I will anyway...

An Army requires training and discipline...otherwise its just an armed mob...
Discipline requires a unifying of thought and direction...

With that in mind :
How many threads and posts , on just this forum , have caused discord and divisiveness among us...?

If we as gun owners have trouble agreeing to a thought , opinion or other discussion of a gun related topic , posted online...then just how are we supposed to be a Army...?
Andy

And that's the problem in a nutshell
Oh well, it's still a fun fantasy, I guess.

 

[CamoDeafie]

If we as gun owners have trouble agreeing to a thought , opinion or other discussion of a gun related topic , posted online...then just how are we supposed to be a Army...?
Andy

And thats why I say only a small percentage, spread out in 50 States, would be able to stand unified... but again, the US Military would also be as spread out; and given that communications could be knocked out, toyed with, or outright destroyed...


More realistically? Small unit tactics and organization would be key in such an event.

On the other hand, how big a percentage of gun owners do you think would be willing to put financial, material, and logistic support for these small units; especially units set up by veterans and certain LEOs?

 

[The Heretic]

After spending many times at a hunter sight in day helping these supposed "hunters" sight in rifles.

I wouldn't be afraid, here is why:

• 30% are mouth breathers
• 20% are on government living
• 60% only have one or two boxes of ammo because that's all they have needed in the last 25 years. They keep loading and unloading the same rounds at the end of season.
• 50% don't hunt with the same grain of bullet they brought out thinking it's zeroed for one, good for all.
• 75% trust the kid at BiMart for a boresight that should get them on paper or within 2" of bullseye.
• 50% think poly tipped will shoot the same as a round nose.
• 90% flinch before pulling the trigger and have their eyes closed before recoil hits them

Possible selection bias.

These impressions of "hunters" might be based on a group of 'hunters' who don't do their own sighting in/etc., whereas some group of gun owners you never see because they do these things for themselves.

 

[Member 5605]

Possible selection bias.

Absolute bias. Based solely on those who I've seen come through.

I may have exaggerated a little too.

 

[TTSX]

It is indeed academic. I have somewhere in a law journal an article some retired colonel (IIRC) wrote about the very subject; what it would take to support a rebellion in the USA.

My back of napkin estimate of gun owners is that we are about one third of the population, and only about 20% of those are serious gun owners (e.g., ones who would frequent this forum), the other 80% being owners who have maybe one or two guns - such as a hunting rifle or shotgun, or a home defense handgun they bought, shot once and locked away for emergencies.

I base that assertion on the Pareto Principle (80/20 rule) and studies (such as Meet America's Gun Super-Owners — With An Average of 17 Firearms Each ).

Of those 20%, how many are fit enough to engage a trained government military? Of those, how many would be willing?

Not many. I think they would still outnumber the any country's military, but not by the numbers a lot of people assume.

17 is all it takes to be super? What about super duper? I can't imagine most people on this site having that few, the way they talk.