question about the modern "american civil war" nonsense

what exactly would be the cause or trigger of this civil war?

who is versing who? is it pro gun vs. anti gun?

how would this be fought? isnt it hypocritical that the "anti gun" folks would fight the pro gun folks with guns? so one side agrees that guns should be banned, and the other disagrees...so they both kill each other with guns? or do the anti gun sympathizers fight with baseball bats and pitch forks?

hmmm..."guns are bad, we should ban them...AHA! i have an idea lets fight each other with GUNS and that'll teach them"

how would this war be fought...the only possible way i can see this scenario playing out would be pro guns fighting against government agents trying to confiscate their guns...but this wouldn't make it a civil war would it?

Its going to be a state thing is what im thinking. State making their own money or the new guns laws like if you build your own not for sale or to be moved over state lines you any one can make a own it. Also this Trayvon Martin , George Zimmerman case here in Fla either way it goes it going to be bad. But is George is found Not guilty i know there is going to be riots.

The anti gun folks aren`t against everyone having guns they are only against citizens having guns. The anti gun folks will use the police and military as a proxy to fight for them because it`s only ok for the police and the military to have guns.

reply to post by ooYODAoo


Not sure what the trigger would be.
I believe the "civil war" people are bringing up would be the citizens vs. the government.

Those Pro Gun and Pro Civil Rights teamed up with those of Occupy Vs The elite interests and state/federal/military totalitarian defenders.

Simple really...and it's NOT nonsense

God darn it - Double post.

I agree that it's nonsense for average people to imagine themselves as some romantic figure with a gun show AR-15 at the modern day Fort Sumter, firing the first shot for Glory or something. It's dangerous because some really DO believe that line of thinking, I fear....but that's a whole different thing.

I think it will come this time as it came before. The States will be the ones to push this and it'll start at that level. More than one state is or had now passed laws in open defiance of new national gun policy directions as well as issues of enforcement of any new Federally directed regulation or law inside individual states. That alone could bring a heated or even HOT confrontation between Federal and State levels of authority which, if taken further, spiral out of control quickly, IMO.

In pure red tape seas of headaches no over the counter aspirin will touch, the Obamacare package and/or the guts of it where it relates to exchanges and mandates has been outlawed. Outright outlawed by multiple states. That will force a confrontation in due time because the national system cannot work piece meal. It must be all or nothing and right now? It's nothing but for the few.....like Missouri.

Civil "war" is coming. Is it a war in the courts, across Constitutional separation of powers and levels of power? Is it unrest in the streets? ...or is it State cops arresting Federal agents or the other way around? We do live in interesting times......and none of this HAS to happen. Washington is in full control of this for going ahead or backing up, IMO.

reply to post by ooYODAoo


There will be no civil war, there most certainly will be a restoration though.
Gun loving Americans know what they have and don't plan on giving it up.
The recent upswing in 2A supporters is evidence of that.
Those who make peaceful change....or something and all.

Originally posted by Tardacus
The anti gun folks aren`t against everyone having guns they are only against citizens having guns. The anti gun folks will use the police and military as a proxy to fight for them because it`s only ok for the police and the military to have guns.

edit on 10-2-2013 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)

yea this is somewhere along the lines of the possibility of this scenario... in this case if this were to play out..

regular armed civilians against federal and local law enforcement plus national guard..you could clearly see who will win this "war" especially with all this live fire training going on in the last couple of months.

how are we supposed to train?

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


yea i think some people believe this to be some sort of the union vs confederacy Esq war...

maybe and hopefully if it does play out, it would be in the court system way that you described rather than blood shed...in this case i consider myself neutral..i own my guns and i dont plan on fighting any cause violently unless i am directly pushed over the edge to do so...and i mean really pushed

Originally posted by ooYODAoo
who is versing who? is it pro gun vs. anti gun?
..................
how would this war be fought...the only possible way i can see this scenario playing out would be pro guns fighting against government agents trying to confiscate their guns...but this wouldn't make it a civil war would it?

The lines won’t be as clear cut as that.

Gun control is just an indicator issue. If you support gun control, it is highly likely that you also support the other draconian government rules that they are trying to force down people’s necks.

The resistance will be fighting against gun control, but that is not the primary reason of the resistance. The resistance is fighting against all government intrusion into people’s privet lives. Gun control being one of the major ones. That is because if people are disarmed, then you have already lost, and any resistance in regard to any other subject after that point is a lost cause. You are dead.

If you still have your guns, you can still fight for your other freedoms if it comes down to that.

Some people that hate guns may support the people fighting gun control, because they believe in personal freedom, while others that hate the government may support it because they hate guns more than the government.

You will have some people that support one side, and others that support the other side. They may be neighbors. If you have a large group in one place that supports the resistance, they may have a fight with another group in another place that supports the government.

The most obvious fracture point is between the rural and the urban population. While the gun grabbing police may have full reign in the city, they may come under fire if they try to venture out into the countryside beyond city limits. The population in the city may support them by a majority, while the population outside, does not.

As for as the state and local governments go.
Some sate and local governments will be on one side, others will be on the other side.

You may have local governments that are openly hostile to the state and national government.

Of the state governments that turn against their armed civilians, they will probably try to order their national guard, and police units to put down the resisting citizens.

You will have some National Guard units that would follow orders to go after resisting civilians. Others wouldn’t. It would depend on the persuasion of the people in the command structure of that unit. Of the ones that did, the full complement wouldn’t show up for duty. They will have disserted and went to the resistance side.

If the willing national guard units get too aggressive, you may even have some rogue guard units that would attack the other units, in an effort to defend the civilian resistance.

Same with the police.

On the national level, The military may refuse to follow such orders. They may even go after national guard units that tried to enforce confiscations. If the military did comply with orders to confiscate guns, it would be the same was as it would be in the national guard. If a unit commander did follow orders to attack civilians, you would have open revolt in the ranks. Even to the individual level. The people in the units will know what the other people’s opinion of the situation is. One tank unit may turn it’s gun on the other people in the unit that are supporting the attack. Once the other people in the unit see that, they may do the same and quickly wipe out the people in the unit that are on the other side, and the entire unit may turn sides right in the middle of the operation.


I will be what is called a “fluid battle field”

.....................

I have often though about the possibility of the US settling down to a dual government system in the end.

The distributed socialist government that would rule over the large metropolitan areas in the country that wanted to join. And the federalist government that would rule over “flyover country”

If you believe in “nationalized everything” Go to the city.
If you believe in “rugged individualism” then go to the country.

People in the city could have their disarmed nanny police state, while the rural population would be well armed and defend themselves when needed.

I'm not thinking Civil War....so much as Revolutionary War.

Things need to change. We've tried to do it through the political channels, but the system is so corrupt that its impossible to do.

I'm no expert, I just play one on ATS. And I think when the dollar crashes, that will be the trigger. As to how it will play out....I don't know. We still need a leader.

Just my two cents worth.

There's not nearly enough people upset enough to take up arms.

I hate the gun control issue also but not enough to brandish a weapon and take to the streets over it.

Until you have an issue that tens of millions of people get upset enough about to risk their lives the biggest event you'll see is something like a Waco.

I think many people are romanticizing about another Civil War but their just isn't enough motivation for it. America is to apathetic to give up their nightly tv shows and their cell phones to go to war.

There is a world of difference between sitting in a comfortable home, on an anonymous Internet connection ( often behind the false sense of security that TOR anonymizers bring ) discussing the notion of rising up and engaging in an armed conflict and actually going outside, armed to the teeth, and walking into combat.

My honest to God belief is that if the FBI actually began going through these statements and hauling folks in for questioning, the majority of people making these statements would likely claim that their WiFi networks must have been compromised - as they themselves would never engage in sedition.

Those who actually do mean what they say, and who would actually have the sand to load their guns and walk outside to engage in combat will fail for the same reason that the current war on drugs is such an abysmal failure - one cannot declare war on oneself.

IMO there are two distinct elements involved in this phenomenon. One is the far right. That is a chestnut I am not sure how to crack. They want America to be what they want America to be - and they refuse to accept any sort of compromise or dilution of their agenda. The other faction is those who are generally fed up. To them I simply say that we have a tool called the Democratic process already at our disposal and if you don't like what is going on in Washington... quit voting for the same damned people that you send there, for their entire careers, over and over again. It's that simple.

My own feeling is that it will never come to much of anything though. It's just the new normal for folks to sit on the Interwebs and say outrageous things. As long as this remains the case, the bar will continue to get pushed further and further - as each successive taboo is broken. Eventually a dialogue will emerge about what Freedom of Speech means and where the boundaries of it are... and the same folks screaming about guns, today, will have a new cause to focus upon.

~Heff

reply to post by Hefficide


That's a pretty good point.

As long as "we the people" still have a process in place to legitimately change things I simply cannot see people skipping over it and going to the extreme.

Now if our government were to declare a King and take away all the power from the people that may very well be a reason to rise up.

reply to post by Hopechest


Just because there is a legitimate way to do something, does not mean there is a functional way to do something.

If the system is stacked against you so that you get nowhere no mater how much you try, then it is a false option. It is just there so they can say that they gave the person a chance.

That is the situation the person in California found himself in.
The outcome was predetermined. The legal process was just going through the motions to get to that desired outcome.

A process is only legitimate when the people writing the laws that govern that process, and the people that enforce that process are not corrupt.

If the majority of people keep electing corrupt individuals into those positions of power. Positions of power that they use to terrorize the minority. Then it leaves the minority with no other option than to use force. That is because the “legitimate system” is being used as a tool of oppression against the minority.

Federalist vs Anti-Federalist.

I don't see it happening easily. Where has violence happened in moden America? Sure there are a few idiots shooting up schools and malls. there's the delusional Timothy McVeigh's of the world trying to take out the entire government by blowing uo an obscure federal building in Oklahoma City. There are some Right Wing whackos walled up in mountain cabins with a barn full of bullets and freeze dried tacos.

The fact is, extreme right wing violence is ineffectual and rare. Most conservatives in this country do not want to overthrow the federal government at all. They may have some guns in the house, but the thought of using them against the police or the national guard is furthest from their thoughts.

Now we come to Left Wing whackos. What do they do? Any time they get uopset they burn down their own houses or run to the corner convenience store and beat up some Koreans because those guys come over here without knowing English and become successes in one generation while the ghetto dwellers are on their fourth generation of welfare. So they burn up cities that are already trashed, act like animals, and wonder what happened to their EBT cards.

The fact is, extreme left wing violence is not as rare, but it is as ineffectual. Most left wingers don't want to overthrow the government; they want the government to give them bigger large screen TVs. They may have some stolen guns in the house, but they use them against their neighbors for "disrespecting" them because they wore the wrong color hoodie.

There is no way either of these groups could mount a cohesive assault against the established government. Even if they wanted to, they are incapable. I don't see it happening myself.

Originally posted by Hopechest
There's not nearly enough people upset enough to take up arms.

IAmerica is to apathetic to give up their nightly tv shows and their cell phones to go to war.

edit on 10-2-2013 by Hopechest because: (no reason given)

this right here is one of the biggest problems...

they might say, "hey well my life isnt directly affected by any of this"

but you see thats how they get us, little by little creeping ever so softly until they are close enough to strike, they will keep stripping us of our freedoms and privacy but just enough that many wont notice and say "its not so bad" until its too late

Originally posted by Hefficide

There is a world of difference between sitting in a comfortable home, on an anonymous Internet connection ( often behind the false sense of security that TOR anonymizers bring ) discussing the notion of rising up and engaging in an armed conflict and actually going outside, armed to the teeth, and walking into combat.

My honest to God belief is that if the FBI actually began going through these statements and hauling folks in for questioning, the majority of people making these statements would likely claim that their WiFi networks must have been compromised - as they themselves would never engage in sedition.

Those who actually do mean what they say, and who would actually have the sand to load their guns and walk outside to engage in combat will fail for the same reason that the current war on drugs is such an abysmal failure - one cannot declare war on oneself.

IMO there are two distinct elements involved in this phenomenon. One is the far right. That is a chestnut I am not sure how to crack. They want America to be what they want America to be - and they refuse to accept any sort of compromise or dilution of their agenda. The other faction is those who are generally fed up. To them I simply say that we have a tool called the Democratic process already at our disposal and if you don't like what is going on in Washington... quit voting for the same damned people that you send there, for their entire careers, over and over again. It's that simple.

My own feeling is that it will never come to much of anything though. It's just the new normal for folks to sit on the Interwebs and say outrageous things. As long as this remains the case, the bar will continue to get pushed further and further - as each successive taboo is broken. Eventually a dialogue will emerge about what Freedom of Speech means and where the boundaries of it are... and the same folks screaming about guns, today, will have a new cause to focus upon.

~Heff

man you really had me going i agree with most of the points you brought up about the keyboard warriors and when the time came to prove themselves they would hide their tails between their legs...

however.....

i completely disagree with your statement about just "voting" our problems away...for someone who has a very realistic sense of whats going on, i am disappointed to know that you actually think that we can just vote our way into a better way of life, that was a very naive and blinded statement in my personal opinion, LOL

let me ask you something...take your time to think about it and answer....

when was the last time that "voting" ever solved or improved anything....

did you vote for the traffic light cameras?

did you vote for the unmanned drones over our skies?

did you vote for the patriot act?

did you vote for the TSA body scanners at the airport?

NO

NO

NO

NO

we never voted for any of those things, they were just implemented, WAKE UP.

im guessing you are from an older generation or dont live in the us?

the above was just my opinion, not to offend anyone