It Is About Freedom, NOT why do You Need an Assault Weapon.

Ask Them If they Need To Be Free.

Without a Gun, How will they Protect their Freedom.

If you Tell them you are going to make them your Slave, How will they Stop You.

If They say Call 911, the government.

You, could then tell them, How Can I help You, I'm from the government.

If the Government has ALL the Guns, We Will Be come Slaves.

If they said that would never happen in the United States,

Ask them if they Saw 9/11 Happening.

If the Pilots On 9/11 were Free To carry Guns like in Isreal, Would 9/11 Happen.

It Is About Freedom to Protect Your Life.

It Is Not About Guns,

It Is About Protecting Freedom.

Asked them Why Do They Need To Be Free.

Just Don't be surprise if they say, No, they Do not want to be Free.


United States Of America________________________
www.LEAP.cc/ -- www.Cures-not-wars.org/ Truth Will Liberate Earth. Law EnForcement Against Prohibition
www.RKBA.org/antis/hci-masterAllege 1993 feinstein/hci PRETEXT for TOTAL Gun Freedom Confiscation.
www.digitalangelcorp.com/ Revelation 13:18 BAN Human Power ID-GPS-MONEY Implant Micro-chip.Patent 5,629,678
FIXED BAYONETS -- FORWARD

on calling 9-11? just ask em well I guess that solves the problem with needing a gun for home defense, we'll just call 911. BUt I do have one question, the average 9mm handgun round travels at 1200 feet per second. the average police car travels at 60 mph with an average response time of 15 minutes and the average police officer travels at 7 mph running. how do you plan on dealing with that problem?





;] works every time. and best of all, it's T-R-U-E

Quoted: If the Government has ALL the Guns, We Will Be come Slaves.

First off, let me say I am as pro-gun as they come. I believe that we should be able to own guns because it is a personal freedom granted to us by our founding fathers, and as free citizens we should be able to exercise this right they have given us. I believe we should be able to own all firearms, up to and including class III weapons; I believe it is the government's job to regulate firearms sales and transfers, not obstruct our right to ownership.

That said:


I always laugh a little when I hear the argument that we need guns to protect us from our government, because without them we will become the governments slaves. I find this a totally illogical argument. We are so out gunned by the government it is ridiculous to think that our guns could stop the national guard from disarming us. No matter how many tansferrable machine guns are owned out there, no matter how many people own ar-15's, it wouldn't matter. The government has tanks, F-15's, helicoptor gunships, etc etc. No civilian milita could ever out gun uncle sam.... I'm sorry to say.

Is it better that we are armed, of course, but your ar-15 or transferrable M16, hell, even your M60 isn't going to be able to take on an M1A1 tank or a Bradley. Just trying to be a realist here.

Should the people be armed, yes. They should be armed because it is our right granted to us as free citizens by our founding fathers. Should we be armed to protect us from our government.... we are so out gunned that it borders on the insane to think that we could defeat the national guard. I wouldn't mind dying trying to defend my family and my freedom.... but still.... there's no way our AR-15's would do any good.  

Quoted: Quoted: If the Government has ALL the Guns, We Will Be come Slaves. I always laugh a little when I hear the argument that we need guns to protect us from our government, because without them we will become the governments slaves. I find this a totally illogical argument. We are so out gunned by the government it is ridiculous to think that our guns could stop the national guard from disarming us. No matter how many tansferrable machine guns are owned out there, no matter how many people own ar-15's, it wouldn't matter. The government has tanks, F-15, helicoptor gunship, etc etc. No civilian milita could ever out gun uncle sam.... I'm sorry to say. Is it better that we are armed, of course, but your ar-15 or transferrable M16, hell, even your M60 isn't going to be able to take on an M1A1 tank or a Bradley. Just trying to be a realist here. Should the people be armed, yes. They should be armed because it is our right granted to us as free citizens by our founding fathers. Should we be armed to protect us from our government.... we are so out gunned that it borders on the insane to think that we could defeat the national guard. I wouldn't mind dying trying to defend my family and my freedom.... but still.... there's no way are AR-15's would do any good.

History has shown that more has been done with less. Nonetheless, good rebuttal.

Quoted: Quoted: If the Government has ALL the Guns, We Will Be come Slaves. I always laugh a little when I hear the argument that we need guns to protect us from our government, because without them we will become the governments slaves. I find this a totally illogical argument. We are so out gunned by the government it is ridiculous to think that our guns could stop the national guard from disarming us. No matter how many tansferrable machine guns are owned out there, no matter how many people own ar-15's, it wouldn't matter. The government has tanks, F-15, helicoptor gunship, etc etc. No civilian milita could ever out gun uncle sam.... I'm sorry to say. Is it better that we are armed, of course, but your ar-15 or transferrable M16, hell, even your M60 isn't going to be able to take on an M1A1 tank or a Bradley. Just trying to be a realist here. Should the people be armed, yes. They should be armed because it is our right granted to us as free citizens by our founding fathers. Should we be armed to protect us from our government.... we are so out gunned that it borders on the insane to think that we could defeat the national guard. I wouldn't mind dying trying to defend my family and my freedom.... but still.... there's no way are AR-15's would do any good.

I remember a little guy named Ho Chi Ninh Funny little guy. In 1945 he went to Paris and was ignored. About 25 years later, there were 58,000 names that needed to be carved on a wall in Washington DC

Facing off with the gubmint would be a big time bust, but if even 5% of the population decided to hammer the government shot here, shot there, they'd be bled white in pretty short order. The American revolution only involved about 5-6% of the population.  

Also remember this: There's quite a few serving military people that'd turn on the government in a heartbeat if government turned on us.

You'd be surprised how many military types that have told me this: I don't serve the government, I serve the American PEOPLE.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: If the Government has ALL the Guns, We Will Be come Slaves. I always laugh a little when I hear the argument that we need guns to protect us from our government, because without them we will become the governments slaves. I find this a totally illogical argument. We are so out gunned by the government it is ridiculous to think that our guns could stop the national guard from disarming us. No matter how many tansferrable machine guns are owned out there, no matter how many people own ar-15's, it wouldn't matter. The government has tanks, F-15, helicoptor gunship, etc etc. No civilian milita could ever out gun uncle sam.... I'm sorry to say. Is it better that we are armed, of course, but your ar-15 or transferrable M16, hell, even your M60 isn't going to be able to take on an M1A1 tank or a Bradley. Just trying to be a realist here. Should the people be armed, yes. They should be armed because it is our right granted to us as free citizens by our founding fathers. Should we be armed to protect us from our government.... we are so out gunned that it borders on the insane to think that we could defeat the national guard. I wouldn't mind dying trying to defend my family and my freedom.... but still.... there's no way are AR-15's would do any good.   History has shown that more has been done with less. Nonetheless, good rebuttal.

History has never seen before a force as powerful as the U.S. military as it exists today. We have the most powerful military in the world, which can defeat every single government's military on the face of the planet, small arms could never defeat such a force.

There is no single event in history that would serve as a comproble parallel to our current situation.  You might try to use Iraq as an example resistance to the U.S. military with small arms, however, if our military was not as restrained as it is now, it could turn all of Iraq to glass if it wished.... it could do the same us.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: If the Government has ALL the Guns, We Will Be come Slaves. I always laugh a little when I hear the argument that we need guns to protect us from our government, because without them we will become the governments slaves. I find this a totally illogical argument. We are so out gunned by the government it is ridiculous to think that our guns could stop the national guard from disarming us. No matter how many tansferrable machine guns are owned out there, no matter how many people own ar-15's, it wouldn't matter. The government has tanks, F-15, helicoptor gunship, etc etc. No civilian milita could ever out gun uncle sam.... I'm sorry to say. Is it better that we are armed, of course, but your ar-15 or transferrable M16, hell, even your M60 isn't going to be able to take on an M1A1 tank or a Bradley. Just trying to be a realist here. Should the people be armed, yes. They should be armed because it is our right granted to us as free citizens by our founding fathers. Should we be armed to protect us from our government.... we are so out gunned that it borders on the insane to think that we could defeat the national guard. I wouldn't mind dying trying to defend my family and my freedom.... but still.... there's no way are AR-15's would do any good.   I remember a little guy named Ho Chi Ninh Funny little guy. In 1945 he went to Paris and was ignored. About 25 years later, there were 58,000 names that needed to be carved on a wall in Washington DC Facing off with the gubmint would be a big time bust, but if even 5% of the population decided to hammer the government shot here, shot there, they'd be bled white in pretty short order. The American revolution only involved about 5-6% of the population.   Also remember this: There's quite a few serving military people that'd turn on the government in a heartbeat if government turned on us. You'd be surprised how many military types that have told me this: I don't serve the government, I serve the American PEOPLE.

If  our current military fought the Vietnam war all over again today, with today's technology, we would have won the Vietnam war in a month. With precision munitions, and advanced senors (thermal imaging/radar imaging) we could have destroyed the Vietnamese resistance no matter how much they tried to use the jungle cover to their advantage. It is extremely hard to hide from this technology. We have better aircraft, better tanks, better everything today, including better information gathering abilities and better networking of force structures. Today we can fight a much more effecient war then we did in vietnam, and it would be brutal.

As for your comments on servicemen leaving the service if our government turned on us, I do not doubt this to be true. I couldn't imagine them not doing so. These are honorable men, and they, I am sure, would die to uphold the constitution, having promised to defend us from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. However, you have to remember, that the government under this kind of senario will control all the media... all information being relayed to the troops in the field. He who controls the information that the people see, hear, and read, has true power. They would engage in a propaganda war to paint the true patriots and resistance to tyranny as sedition to the government, and treason. This could fool a substantial number of our troops into fighting for the wrong side.  

Quoted: First off, let me say I am as pro-gun as they come. I believe that we should be able to own guns because it is a personal freedom granted to us by our founding fathers, and as free citizens we should be able to exercise this right they have given us.

Let me correct you a little bit...  our Founding Fathers didn't grant us anything.  Our rights are considered natural and self-evident.  They only protected those rights from infringement by the government they envisioned.  

On other points, about the .gov having more than we do, sure they do.  But how many soldiers do you know that would fire on American citizens if they were given an unlawful order, or were basically instructed to violate the Constitution they were sworn to protect??  

I think if the .gov did become tyrannical, the military would not be on their side.  

Why would the US gov't turn American cities into sheets of glass?  Wouldn't that be counterproductive?  I don't think that a "revolutionary army" would be concentrated enough for even a tactical nuke.