From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: What if...
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 14:22:34 GMT

In <1992Nov8.043940.13113@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore) writes:

>Keywords: 

>In article <1992Nov5.023044.15241@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>]In <1992Nov3.160347.18507@awdprime.austin.ibm.com> curt@ekhadafi.austin.ibm.com (Curt Finch 903 2F021 curt@aixwiz.austin.ibm.com 512-838-2806) writes:
>]
>]
>]>People in the government and in the military know this, which is why
>]>they've never tried it before.  I'm not sure why the NRA never brings
>]>this point up.
>]
>]Well, this is the popular mythology, but don't you believe it.  You
>]put a bunch of untrained civilians up against trained troops and what
>]you're going to get is a bunch of dead civilians.  Oh, it would no

>A lot of those civilians are former trained troops, and a lot have
>more combat experience than the current military.

Yes, a lot of us are and have.  However, even that doesn't get you as
much as you would think; discipline and a clear chain of command are
real important in combat (before, during, and after).  Just how many
civilians (even civilians with military experience) are going to be
willing to subordinate themselves to someone else's judgement?  I
wouldn't be, most likely.

>]doubt get VERY ugly, but if he could rely on the military and police
>]to even TRY to follow such orders (he can't -- no commander in his
>]right mind would dream of doing this), a military dictatorship just
>]wouldn't be all that hard to do in this country.  A lot of people TALK

>Keep in mind that a commander can count on his troops to follow lawful
>orders, but would find it much harder to get his troops to put down
>a civil insurrection against a military dictatorship.

I mentioned this initially, but then went on to build the scenario
where troops/police could be expected to follow such orders.  I
consider it quite unlikely that a COMMANDER would follow such orders
from his higher command -- less likely, in fact, than that the troops
would follow such orders.

>]a good fight, but are too comfortable to fight.  Hell, look how many
>]of our Constitutional rights have already been taken and people even
>]VOTE TO CONTINUE IT.

>This is true. A lot of people who say they would fight would change their
>minds when they found out what a military dictatorship could do to them
>and their loved ones. However, even under the rule of Hitler, the Yugoslavians
>were able to tie down 7 divisions in their little country. The citizens of
>the USA could do better.

Yes, but what would be the strength to oppose them (keeping the
assumption that troops and police could be expected to 'fall into
line' and back this)?  Hell, just the police force in NYC amounts to
several divisions (strength-wise).  Toss in 15 regular Army divisions,
all the FBI, police everywhere, and I think it could be done -- all on
the assumption that the 'uniforms' could be relied upon to back the
government and not the Constitution, of course.

This does raise the question of just whose side we should reasonably
expect the Reserves (who are Federal troops) and the National Guard
(who ostensibly belong to the state but whose weapons are in the care
of the Feds) to come down on.  Personally, I would feel a lot more
comfortable that the original intent of the 2nd Amendment was being
fullfilled if we had a system like the Swiss, and those weapons were
kept in the homes of the National Guardsmen.  So I think the whole
'right to keep and bear arms' as interpreted for sporting weapons is a
red herring, and I wouldn't expect a basically disorganized rabble
with a mottley assortment of sporting weapons to be able to stand up
for long against regular troops.

>]
>]So those who would actually fight would be a minority, and the rest
>]would be more than happy to inform on them to earn brownie points with
>]the authorities.

>No, only a few would inform. Most of the rest would do their best to
>not attract attention of either side.

Depends on what they made the 'rewards' like.


-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:23396 talk.politics.misc:59440 tx.politics:7168