Republicans and their guns.

[grumpyduck]

I have a friend from almost fifty years ago. Met in college. Hell of a nice guy, lots of fun, owned his own business, put his daughter thru college, involved in stuff, etc. etc. But he happens to be a republican and long-time (long-time) gun enthusiast.

A few years ago I visited him (he lives in another state) and he showed me his gun collection, including two AR15s, other rifles, handguns, and his huge collection of reloaded ammo. As we chatted, he mentioned being able to defend himself if "they" came for his guns.

I didn't want to say anything (I like the guy), but my thinking went like this: he lives in a detached split ranch. Yards on all four sides. Windows on two levels. If "they" came for him, he would only be able to defend one side at a time. Even if his wife joined in, it would still only be two sides, leaving two sides vulnerable. One or two flash-bangs thru an unprotected side and it would be all over.

I guess I just don't get it.

[AndyS]

1. Guns foster a sense of overblown self esteem and grandiose

self defense ability. No amount of evidence, proof or science based data will ever change that. Like drugs gun ownership causes a change in brain function.

[Initech]

2. I think it's an addiction for some people.

And the paranoia comes from the people who are thinking that they will no longer be able to have their vice.

[Chainfire]

3. Remember the one word line from The Graduate? Plastics. The key word here is logistics.

I have heard these types of "defense" scenarios for years. It shows that the people who foster such theories have just not thought them through. Defending a home against a police force has a predetermined ending; either capture or death. A fortress is nothing more than a prison or a death trap, one Molotov cocktail from becoming an oven. The man and his wife think that they will prevail because they can defend two side of the house which is asinine. When someone has to sleep they can only cover a quarter of their fortress and then only if they outnumber their opponents...

The same goes for all of the people who plan to "head to the mountains." These folks never consider logistical elements as part of their planning. They never consider how they will get there, or that the people who currently live "in the mountains" are not going to welcome them with open arms. They don't think in terms of having to compete with each other for scarce resources. They don't consider that a minor wound in a modern army can quickly become a fatal wound without proper medical care. They do not believe in a necessary system of resupply of food, weapons, medicines or fuel. They do not value intelligence resources or air power or a structure of leadership. With cell phones down they would have to depend on smoke signals. runners or telepathy to communicate with each other. In fact, with phones down most of them could not tell you the time of day... Many of them do not even consider that sooner or later, they have to sleep.... The survivalist/militia types live in cloud cuckoo land, often brought own by watching too many action hero movies....

Owning a firearm and a ton of ammo does not magically convert a person into a special forces hero....A gathering of people who know how to shoot doesn't make for an "army." But, just as they do not face the truth of politics, they do not face the truth about survival in a time of social upheaval. There are people among us that look forward to a civil war as some great adventure, where they always prevail and the enemy always dies. They think like children. They are just damn fools.