I’ve spoken about the class of people who generally use the term. Speaking about you, personally, in this forum, probably isn’t much allowed.
That said, being a whiny baby who can’t handle attacks on their positions is hardly enough to keep anybody out of a discussion - heck, the term was specifically invented to describe people on the internet who were, against all odds, still on the internet arguing for their minority positions. Some people can be argued into submission and retreat, but hardly all.
I’m a CC advocate that doesn’t open carry. I don’t carry at all. I suppose my better answer is, “because I don’t own a firearm.” Does that mean I can’t be a CC advocate?
I have to say I find it a bit ridiculous that so many people are flippantly dismissive of the “civil unrest” scenario when our country is seemingly closer to complete collapse than it’s ever been, with the current administration, Russian situation, and potentially disastrous economic policy.
Maybe they can take over *another *bird sanctuary next time. Maybe they can remember to bring enough desserts, too.
But if their longed-for and practiced-for fantasy scenario were, somehow, to come to pass anyway: The lawless local bullies aren’t going to be the government they’ll claim to oppose. They’ll be them. They won’t be protecting us from the vigilantes. They’ll be the vigilantes. They will BE the insurrection the Constitution establishes means for us to protect ourselves from. But they won’t be well-regulated, just a gang of thugs. The bad guys themselves.
I think a lot of the pro AR-15 ownership movement is being driven by the prepper/survivalist community. They are of the mindset they need an assault rifle to defend their homes from roving bands of unprepared survivors in event of TEOTWAWKI (The End of the World as we Know It).
Some of it will be, for damn sure. There would certainly be no end of infighting among that group itself, in this scenario. But there will be others who would “improvise and adapt” with whatever was at hand, including sheer numbers. There would be riots over food, there would be riots over access to electrical power and utilities…jesus, man, watch the movie Threads if you haven’t already. It is the ONLY, and I mean the ONLY accurate movie made about the aftermath of a nuclear exchange. But it wouldn’t even need to be a full-blown “exchange” to do it. Minus the long-term environmental consequences, the same scenario could result from three well-coordinated nuclear or bioterrorism attacks in the 3 largest American cities. Rogue states and the influence of ex-Soviet puppet-masters being what it is, that would be in no way an impossibility in the near future.
And, to be honest, all the fear mongering about the coming fall of civilization is what makes me think about getting a gun sometimes. But I just need a handgun, something to keep me from being completely naked, until I hooked up with my much better armed friends and we took over the local commissary (little known fact, at least as far as post apocalypse shows are concerned, grocery stores are not where they keep the majority of the food.) I have a gun store and shooting range less than a mile away, and they know me well enough to believe that I am on their side in that situation.
What I don’t need come the fall of civilization is a cache of guns that is too big to move. Then you either end up staying in one place, until you either starve or are overwhelmed by greater forces, or you leave them behind for other people to pick up and maybe use against you.
I think some of the people who truly possess what you’re referring to, are driven more by sheer acquisitionism than true “prepping.” They’re compulsive collectors, usually with a lot of money. The one guy like this that I know, is wealthy enough to hold out on his farm for years if he wanted to, he has the livestock, supplies, and water from an underground well. He could subsist on that property for a really, really long time, and has the connections to get re-supplied with anything he needs (assuming that communications systems would still be up and running in this scenario, which is in no way a given.) They aren’t necessarily cranks, although some of them assuredly lean that way.
Depends on the circumstances. If he has a few employees and brothers who have military training - which he does - they might be able to hold their own against any combination of un-trained and un-organized people. (Not to mention he’s on very good terms with a number of cops and sherrif’s deputies.) Against trained and organized people, who the fuck knows. Let’s really, really hope it doesn’t come to this. There is no way of really knowing how it would play out, any speculation about it truly is just speculation. It can be interesting to contemplate…if also horrible.
Seconded. Civilization is not hovering on the brink of collapse. Making plans to prepare for the collapse of society read to me like exercises in fantasy - speculative fiction. Using such fictions as a justification to own a military weapon are nonsensical and not to be given credence to - despite such frivolous pseudojustifications being a major marketing tactic of the NRA. Presuming that we’re not talking about suckers, it’s much more reasonable to believe the the people in question like their military weapons for other, unrelated reasons (probably something along the lines of ‘they’re awesome!’) and this post-apocalyptic nonsense is just after-the-fact justification.
I would scarcely call mischaracterizing something successful use of the language. I think the title of the post may have had something to do with assuming you were talking about AR15s.