In article <scottj-150493092731@iamac-1.dml.georgetown.edu> scottj@magic.dml.georgetown.edu (John L. Scott) writes: > > [ ... picking nits over tanks firing the main gun or not deleted ...] >   I think the point is being missed - that it is apparantly acceptable for Big Government (Big Brother?) to use TANKS to control the people, as long as they don't use the BIG GUN (but everything else is allright...).  Tanks deployed against civilians, let alone FIRING on them with crew served weaponry (a .50 Heavy Machine Gun is crew-served) is something both our press and government howl about instantly when done in some other country.  Against civilians that have, at most, one-shot-at-a-time LIGHT small arms.  Certainly nothing that places the people in or behind the tank in any real danger.  Molotov coctails?  A round from a rifle or pistol deals with anybody approaching with one of those.  And "snipers" too often turn out to be strays from other cops/guard/army gunfire.  I don't know about the other people in this group (or on the net) but the idea of tanks being used to control civilians, in anything that pretends to be a free society is outrageous.  When Big Government feels it is necessary to use that kind of force to stomp out protests (even violent) of the citizens, that suggests that the government is totally out of control, since that is effectively the government declaring war on its own people.  If the government was living up to its responsibility, government of the people BY THE PEOPLE, not the 'lords' and other elites who want to keep their good thing going, the citizens wouldn't feel the need to be resorting to acts that need to be squashed with a military boot.  People do things like that because they have become convinced that it is the only option that remains, other attempts to have grievances redressed have been ignored.  And yes, there is a criminal element that will exploit this, but the fact remains that the government has been unresponsive or such acts wouldn't be apt to happen.  Still not an excuse to open up on civilians with tanks, heavy machine guns, or whatever. Its the old 'might makes right' philosophy that is the hallmark of a government going rogue:  They don't like it? Tough. We will simply squash them under an iron boot.  Actually addressing their grievances in other than token fashion with huge volumes of hot air is just too inconvenient...  Sort of a variation on mushroom management:  Keep them in the dark, Smother them with shit, and Crush them when ready...  And these are the folks that many liberals are trying to arrange things so that they will have a MONOPOLY on coercive force (firearms that are than expensive toys...) by gutting the Bill of Rights (cuz it just isn't PROGRESSIVE or doesn't fit in with MODERN THINKING anymore)...  Unbelievable.  And I do believe amid the smoke, confusion, etc of a real riot situation, that it would be POSSIBLE for a tank to get away with firing the main gun into a building at close range?  One would hear an explosion among many explosions.  It is loud, but it is not going to stand out like a 1000 pound bomb or a tactical nuke.  There would be a hole blown in the wall, and some rubble, but with tanks knocking over walls, and other sources of buildings turning into rubble, and other covering racket such as gunfire, including 50's tacking away, it would not stand out that much, and could be explained by "musta been a gas leak... ".  I think it could be done and not be reported under such conditions - it is POSSIBLE.  It is not like a tank driving down a quiet street on a Sunday afternoon, turning and firing, you know.  THAT would stand out, and be pretty impossible to cover up.  >--John L. Scott