Quote Originally Posted by oakchas View Post
Yeah, what he said... Then what?
The article "In Defense of the Second Amendment" by Gary North, while well thought out with several good points, makes far too many assumptions based on hypotheticals.

They may not be as heavily armed as rural residents of Afghanistan, but they are surely better armed than any other Western nation except Switzerland.
Guerrilla warfare as evidenced well by not only the Afghans, but N.Vietnamese as well; has been established as a very effective action. It is not w/o a price as the cost is high both in human toll and supply.

Though I do not publicly condone or endorse this type of action, I can not argue against it's effectiveness.

In the event of complete civil breakdown, I find it a difficult argument to make that U.S soldiers would fire on American Citizens (if) a wide scale conflict ensued stemming from constitutional violations.
The scenario has far too many dynamics to predict with any certainty.

I know many will say that a soldier in the U.S armed services is sworn to "defend against (ALL) enemies foreign AND domestic".

I will counter that oath with a soldier is obliged and dutifully bound to disobey any order that they feel is unlawful.

"I was just following orders" does not cut it, not even from a legal stand point be it a military tribunal or civil..