Jump to content

A speech worth listening to...


jjjxlr8

Recommended Posts

I support the thoughts up to about 4:45 where he goes into discussing tyranny in the US. I think that part of the argument needs to be left out. Makes everyone think conspiracy theory wacko gun nut. The previous argument about personal protect and stats regarding the use of semi auto rifles is more solid to discuss if you're looking fight the cause.

 

Just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I support the thoughts up to about 4:45 where he goes into discussing tyranny in the US. I think that part of the argument needs to be left out. Makes everyone think conspiracy theory wacko gun nut. The previous argument about personal protect and stats regarding the use of semi auto rifles is more solid to discuss if you're looking fight the cause.

 

Just my opinion.

 

Doesn't make me think "conspiracy theory wacko gun nut."

 

You don't think tyranny is something we need to be concerned with in the US?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't think tyranny is something we need to be concerned with in the US?

 

Not saying that at all. I'm saying don't put that argument in the same one as the first part. If you want to discuss "crime control" and the problems of mental illness and the medication madness that's cool, I'm 110% behind those conversations, but I don't want that mixed in with Tyranny and fear of gov't. Fight those separately as the opposition will gladly mix everyone in the same pot of gun lover wacko's and will focus on the tyranny part and leverage the rest as just a supporting piece to the tyranny cause.

 

Make sense? Divide and conquer and focus on battles separately before moving forward with an approach that exposes a greater likelihood of having to defend a view that others are more open to seeing and agreeing with.

 

In reality though, I don't care if everyone here on CR has AK's and AR's, if the military / gov't wanted to take over Cbus, none of us would stand a chance at stopping them. The rebels overseas are struggling and the gov't they are fighting isn't armed nearly as well as ours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reality though, I don't care if everyone here on CR has AK's and AR's, if the military / gov't wanted to take over Cbus, none of us would stand a chance at stopping them. The rebels overseas are struggling and the gov't they are fighting isn't armed nearly as well as ours.

 

I'm not so sure about that. I'm betting a rebel militia could cause one hell of a mess for the US military.

 

The Afghans pretty much fended off the Russians with a large pile of rocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question I'm curious of, is how many of our military men and women would fight against their own people? 50/50? 75/25? There are something like 80 million gun owners in the US, even if just a small fraction of that number were willing to fight, that's still a whole lot of people.

 

Related to OP, I'm a fan of Whittle most of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...gun lover wacko's ...

 

You keep using this term...

 

What do you mean?

 

I don't think that most people who are concerned with the concentration of government power are "gun lover wackos."

 

Why do you think that many congressmen and woman want to disarm the public? Many have said so in public forums, others behind what they thought were 'closed doors' but the fact is that there are plenty of people in our government that feel people should not own firearms at all. There are plenty of Countries outside the US that have the same goal - to disarm the American People.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not so sure about that. I'm betting a rebel militia could cause one hell of a mess for the US military.

 

The Afghans pretty much fended off the Russians with a large pile of rocks.

 

i agree, the key however is communication. the govn't will try to label us as terrorists and pic us off one by one starting with the biggest threats the ones that are the easiest to sell (with the help of the media) as dangerous or terrorist organizations.

 

and no matter what the truth is they will always put a spin on it so their actions seem justified.

 

it's the war with no front lines that scares me the most.

 

how are we going to be able to communicate when they shut off cell phones and internet.

how many of us really have short wave/ham radios?

 

p.s. i'm buying this

http://cdn1.bigcommerce.com/server4200/wn7ep/products/21093/images/21023/fedepicxm855bar__83037.1357925774.1280.1280.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's not turn this into a 'fight the government' thread...lol. That scenario is highly unlikely and not really the point of the speech.

 

Did anyone notice that the video was a bit off? To me, it seemed that the speech was not actually delivered to congress, but filmed separately and video bits were added in to make it look like he had an audience. The sound and the lighting and the cuts seemed off to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's not turn this into a 'fight the government' thread...lol. That scenario is highly unlikely and not really the point of the speech.

 

Did anyone notice that the video was a bit off? To me, it seemed that the speech was not actually delivered to congress, but filmed separately and video bits were added in to make it look like he had an audience. The sound and the lighting and the cuts seemed off to me.

 

Bill Whittle isn't really addressing Congress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...