How many times do I need to answer that?  You obviously won't accept what I am saying, you don't think international application of US resources is different than domestic.
How many? I don't know, a million maybe. Because you're wrong.

I already answered that.  Biological warfare.  Kill those 1000 US citizens before they infect 20,000 more.
The US government, even if run and controlled by future socialist like AOC, won't release airborne pathogens into an open environment.

Plus if Tommy won't do it what do you need the guns to protect yourself from "The Government" for?
While Tommy won't push the button, he will join his fellow soldiers and kick open doors.

Eegore wrote on 10/14/19 at 07:26:57:

  I don't expect my AR to stop a Carrier Group .

That will NOT happen. Until the Socialists have total control of this Nation.
Then, and only then, will the head Socialists, ORDER that to happen.
To remove the last remaining stash of firearms located in …
And ONLY after they have convinced all the ‘Useful Idiots’,
(aka, UL FDS GBS's)
of giving up any way, shape, or form, of defending themselves.

“…active shooters want a high death count…”
Active ’shooters’, aka, Terrorists, will just hijack Airplanes, and fly them into buildings to get their, ‘high death count’.
The DFI’s at a School/Church/LV/etc,  aka, Terrorists, use a semi auto firearm because they have been, TOLD,  just the looks of that, sends shivers down the spine of FDS’s.
And Yep, Banning  a gun, is the same as banning red cars to stop bank robbery.

Gatling Gun, 1860, first successful semi-auto, that was hand operated.
1885, first successful semi-auto, that was gas operated.
1905 the first successful semi-auto, made in this Nation, that was gas operated.

Guess what folks, banning the AR-15 brand of firearm, and all like it,
Will BAN ALL, Semi-Auto firearms.
The Rem Mod 740, 742, 7400, 4, from 1955 to current, with a detachable clip, would be Far, FAR, more destructive, then the puny .223.
The Ruger, Mini-14/Mini-30, from 1973 to current, with a detachable clip, would be Far, FAR, more destructive, then the puny .223.
And this is a VERY LONG LIST !
Yep, Banning  a gun, is the same as banning red cars to stop bank robbery.

“…Also compromise and accept…”
Americans have been compromising and accepting their lack of freedom since 1934.
And it has NOT Worked. for 85 Years !

It is time to Stop, treating the symptoms  of the disease.
And treat the Disease.

zevenenergie wrote on 10/14/19 at 07:17:14:

I think banning all weapens is absolutely nessesary.  

Here is a donation place.
I am sure he will welcome your hard earned money !

https://betoorourke.com/

"...Personal firearms won't stop the US Government
I don't expect my AR to stop a Carrier Group from leveling every power plant, water treatment, Hospital, Fuel and Food supply in my area.  . ..."

So the argument of some, that a firearm in the hands of Civilians is no match for a Cruise Missile.

I then ask:
"Why is not Afghanistan simply a pile of molten glass ?

Could it possibly be the same reason that Terrorists hide in churches and schools?

Could it be that in this country, the Socialists, that would give such a order, do not want the, 'Useful Idiots', to be destroyed along with the really bad people, who believe in Freedom?

"So your point is because we have a treaty with a foreign nation, we wouldn't dare launch a widespread attack but despite the fact we have a Constitution, we'll go ahead an poison the water supply for the entire city of Omaha just to stop a rebellion? That's what you're going with."


 You ask why we haven't just went out and nuked other countries, or used biological weapons and I provided reference for why that is.  

The question as posed isn't to "stop a rebellion" it is to eradicate all firearm ownership from every single US citizen by means of US Government order.  

 I do not feel that using a nuke in Afghanistan has equal international repercussion as using, in clandestine implementation, biological weapons inside the US on US citizens.  If the Government is willing to kill its own staff in door to door gunfights, why wouldn't they choose a more efficient method?  Why go the bloodiest route?

 "Yes. As a military guy, you should know that. Send a "Band of Brothers" into a dangerous situation, and they'll kill anyone to protect their Brother. Tommy will shoot to defend his buddies, but he's far less likely to push a button that kills thousands indiscriminately."

 I don't agree with that based off of Drone usage and PTSD studies alone, but that's not the point.  

 So the logic here is to kill a lot of Tommys door to door because they are less likely to say no, instead of telling Tommy all those people in LA are dead already, look at the footage of them writhing on the ground coughing up blood.  Should we allow that contagion into your neighborhood Tommy?  Want to watch your family bleed out too Tommy?

 

zevenenergie wrote on 10/14/19 at 11:44:10:

I wil first drone your village, and then nuke it.
Than bring democracy while I drain the oil from your savage.
And than donate $5,- to Beto, and change the law, knowing that you are a law-abiding citizen.

WOW,
ANOTHER 'member',
saying the same things tt wan't to !!!

I wil first drone your village, and then nuke it.

My village???  Really??? Are you one of those Nigerian Princes with millions of dollars and you're willing to share some with me if I'll just send $10,000 to prove my good faith?....