Jump to content
eveln

Only in America.

Recommended Posts

So what's the point of your average man/ woman having a gun then ?

It seems to help them deal with their insecurity.

 

That it so rarely, if ever, manages to do so in practice seems lost on them.

 

People buy insurance that most will never use but it makes them feel more secure. It's not unusual. You may know that the odds of needing a gun is low, but the consequences could be catestrophic if you don't have one. Just look at the people who become victims of crime every year.

 

I'd be perfectly happy with that explanation if buying insurance for whatever didn't have the downside of increasing the risks of potentially killing your family : )

 

I get it. I think maybe looking at opportunity costs is something we don't emphasise enough, if so many people are so bad at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Big Government is the commonest phobia, "they want to take our guns so they can control us."

 

Kind of ignores the fact that the armed forces, and the police might be armed and be government employees but they are also citizens, are they going to just blindly become government oppressors ?

 

Some argue that events like Kent State, which was a long time ago, say yes, in the end I very seriously doubt it.

 

However combine gun-love, Constitution love and paranoia - hard nut to crack...

 

Cheers

Worked well for the Germans the Chinese and various other cultures in the past.

 

Really think that someone given power wouldn't be happy to oppress citizens of their own culture? Might need to speak to the people who have either been beaten to death or near to death by Chengguan.

 

Or just this simple experiment might help: Stanford prison experiment.

 

So far the shootings in the US have almost exclusively occurred in gun free zones or states that high restrictions on firearms.

 

13 Dead in one night in NYC.

 

A small list of instances where open or concealed carry has resulted in preservation of life (Most links are dead now but an easy Google will find you relevant news links).

 

http://www.activistpost.com/2012/07/25-rea...eserve-our.html

 

Drop in crime rates after Illinois allowed concealed carry:

 

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/04/126664-coi...ts-immediately/

 

I support American citizens their right to the second amendment, I don't however agree with the need to walk down the street with an M4 or AR-15.

 

Take that as you will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd contend that the US is a very different society to China, or Fascist era Germany Xen. It would not be impossible to have an oppressive regime appear that could enlist enough armed supplicants I suppose to hold the population in servitude or fear. Some might argue that is already the case with the amount of weaponry in the average police cruiser but information control, not weapons control is key to a successful oppressive dictatorship.

 

We live in the information age, it's a commodity that has become pretty much impossible to stem.

 

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hated having an issued weapon in Iraq and Afghanistan. I felt that I could do so much more for the war effort if I had two free hands to work with, instead of maybe one free hand and a gun in the other hand. It's more of a burden than anything, and even in a firefight, I would prefer not to have a gun starting out and just have something to take cover behind and a team of skilled fighters on my side ... armed or not.

haha you should have just got a sling if you wanted to use both hands, I loved carrying a gun around, how else can you shoot cans when you're bored?

 

I dont get what you mean how you would prefer not to have a gun in a firefight and a team of non-armed skilled fighters? I was in Iraq and Afghan too and being unarmed in a firefight is a ridiculous proposition, If you are in a fight you want an M4 with pec2 laser, ninox and a GLA. If you have that your AK-47 wielding foe is outclassed and will have a very short lifespan. All you need to do if you're not a skilled fighter is wait for night fall and its a shooting gallery..

 

What corp where you in? A cook by the sounds of it :P

 

on topic..

 

I love guns, But australia is doing pretty well without them. If we had the 2nd amendment I would buy a whole heap and love it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hated having an issued weapon in Iraq and Afghanistan. I felt that I could do so much more for the war effort if I had two free hands to work with, instead of maybe one free hand and a gun in the other hand. It's more of a burden than anything, and even in a firefight, I would prefer not to have a gun starting out and just have something to take cover behind and a team of skilled fighters on my side ... armed or not.

haha you should have just got a sling if you wanted to use both hands, I loved carrying a gun around, how else can you shoot cans when you're bored?

 

I dont get what you mean how you would prefer not to have a gun in a firefight and a team of non-armed skilled fighters? I was in Iraq and Afghan too and being unarmed in a firefight is a ridiculous proposition, If you are in a fight you want an M4 with pec2 laser, ninox and a GLA. If you have that your AK-47 wielding foe is outclassed and will have a very short lifespan. All you need to do if you're not a skilled fighter is wait for night fall and its a shooting gallery..

 

What corp where you in? A cook by the sounds of it :P

 

on topic..

 

I love guns, But australia is doing pretty well without them. If we had the 2nd amendment I would buy a whole heap and love it.

 

Even with a 3-point sling, the weapon bounces around when you move and it needs your hands to control it so it doesn't trip you up. With the sling I had, if I just let it go and ignored it, it would fall to my feet (as it tried to do in the chow hall on a few occasions). Eventually I only wore the sling so that the weapon couldn't be taken away from me and still used a two-handed carry.

 

You can also shoot at cans with golf balls when you're bored. Takes more skill too.

 

Being in aviation, all of our weapons that we used were mounted weapons, not personal carry weapons. I definitely prefer using the AN/PAQ-4C to aim instead of just walking the rounds in on the target, and flying a dark helicopter at night does make us pretty much invincible. Just from our training, it was pretty clear to me that we could clear out a compound using just vehicle mounted weapons on trucks and helicopters and clear rooms using det cord, flashbangs, smoke grenades, and zip ties. No need for firearms, and if anything, it just reduces the amount of captured enemies and increases the likelihood of friendly fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice response, I mostly agree too. The only hole is when teir 3 assets like Helo's are called to other engagments there still needs to be a security pressence on the ground, visable to the locals. There still has to be patrols to ensure control of the contested territory and if something happens which it usually does, fast air isnt always available to respond in good time.

 

Take the ISIS crisis tho, sending in ground forces to assist is a bad idea and all the work should be done with air and armour. But thats a different type of conflict to what you see with counter insurgency operations in Afghan.

 

Anyway, i get what ya mean, but it is situational :P

 

What was your role in Av ? I spent most my time in Kabul and TK driving armoured land rovers around

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was your role in Av ? I spent most my time in Kabul and TK driving armoured land rovers around

I was a UH-60 BlackHawk helicopter mechanic (crew chief). I spent most of my time maintaining and repairing the actual hangar instead of the actual aircraft. :D We spent way more time on ground support equipment to keep the maintenance assets in tip-top shape than actually using maintenance equipment to keep helicopters in a combat ready status. It's a whole lot of work to keep vehicle assets in the fight. Definitely worth the effort and time better spent than patrolling on foot.

 

I feel that just the presence of official military personnel even unarmed should keep the locals aware of the security presence. Just the thought of capturing or killing a soldier should strike moral terror into the enemy. Especially if we were any damn good at actually helping the civilians and winning the hearts and minds of the local national population instead of just killing and imprisoning everybody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For all the shortcomings Islamic militant groups have, being easily scared is not one of them. " Just the thought of capturing or killing a soldier should strike moral terror into the enemy"

This may work with some educated enemies but when you face an enemy where they gain a victory in death, or martyrdom, its a game changer.

 

How many years have gunships like apaches been absolutely destroying any combatants in the field? I dunno how many feeds ive seen of succesful hits or lethal support but none of that fears them, they know its coming and try to counter it with some feeble tactics.

 

If I was on the receiving end of what our air does to people i would have moral terror to not fight, no doubt. But years after years the Islamic militants glorify their dead despite their losses only a factor to being completely out gunned.

 

Did you get to fly around much? I thought Afghan was quite picturesque in the winter with the mountain ranges capped with snow. I have a few good ground photos of palaces, Kabul city, old soviet tanks and stuff that I could trade you for some arial pics (preferably in winter) if you had some :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For all the shortcomings Islamic militant groups have, being easily scared is not one of them. " Just the thought of capturing or killing a soldier should strike moral terror into the enemy"

This may work with some educated enemies but when you face an enemy where they gain a victory in death, or martyrdom, its a game changer.

 

How many years have gunships like apaches been absolutely destroying any combatants in the field? I dunno how many feeds ive seen of succesful hits or lethal support but none of that fears them, they know its coming and try to counter it with some feeble tactics.

 

If I was on the receiving end of what our air does to people i would have moral terror to not fight, no doubt. But years after years the Islamic militants glorify their dead despite their losses only a factor to being completely out gunned.

 

Did you get to fly around much? I thought Afghan was quite picturesque in the winter with the mountain ranges capped with snow. I have a few good ground photos of palaces, Kabul city, old soviet tanks and stuff that I could trade you for some arial pics (preferably in winter) if you had some :D

Wasn't much of a photographer, and didn't fly in winter or near the mountains. I was in the muddy southern regions. I did stop by Manas Airbase in Kyrgyzstan and Bagram in the winter and watched the F-15s take off and skim the mountains at dusk, but I didn't have a camera.

 

Martyrdom is only effective when the enemy is oppressive. "Shoot first and ask questions later" tactics only feed into it. If we could enlist muslim soldiers to a unit and use diplomacy to collaberate with local nationals, I suspect that unit would be far more effective at securing towns with minimal force and have a longer lasting impact against the enemy forces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

haha theres not much to take photos of in the muddy south, I cant believe how many people have died fighting over the vast plans of dirt thats around there.

 

We did enlist muslim soldiers to a unit, they are called the ANA. Aussies have a mentor team that train them, get them on patrol, talk to the locals etc. But the problem is insider attacks which we have suffered a lot of losses from. Terrorists joining the ANA and gunning us down once we turn our back. Its impossible to trust them and the safety precautions we take to protect us from getting gunned in the back makes the ANA less effective and kinda puts a wet blanket on the whole concept.

Ultimately we all need to get the fuk out of that shit hole of a country and leave them to go back to killing each other in tribal and sectarian warfare.

 

We should have left after Bin laden was killed i think.

 

What about the Iraqi army you guys trained ? that was based of the same theory too and they all ran like cowards from ISIS.

 

The lesson to be learnt from all of this? Civilised nations should not get involved in wars with middle eastern religous savages. No war no problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd contend that the US is a very different society to China, or Fascist era Germany Xen. It would not be impossible to have an oppressive regime appear that could enlist enough armed supplicants I suppose to hold the population in servitude or fear. Some might argue that is already the case with the amount of weaponry in the average police cruiser but information control, not weapons control is key to a successful oppressive dictatorship.

 

We live in the information age, it's a commodity that has become pretty much impossible to stem.

 

Cheers

Their equipment is not the the problem. I have no issue with them having a shotgun or AR in the boot, it's the attitude of a large number of police that's the problem. They're not about protecting and serving any more but rather are thinking of themselves as soldiers in a war with people on the street as the enemy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd contend that the US is a very different society to China, or Fascist era Germany Xen. It would not be impossible to have an oppressive regime appear that could enlist enough armed supplicants I suppose to hold the population in servitude or fear. Some might argue that is already the case with the amount of weaponry in the average police cruiser but information control, not weapons control is key to a successful oppressive dictatorship.

 

We live in the information age, it's a commodity that has become pretty much impossible to stem.

 

Cheers

Their equipment is not the the problem. I have no issue with them having a shotgun or AR in the boot, it's the attitude of a large number of police that's the problem. They're not about protecting and serving any more but rather are thinking of themselves as soldiers in a war with people on the street as the enemy.

 

Soldiers in war are not that well equipped

 

http://www.dailyslave.com/wp-content/uploa...05/swatteam.jpg

 

https://news.vice.com/article/aclu-report-s...-like-war-zones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×