Armed civilian militia. Is this the answer?

Recommended Posts

  • Forum Support
scott h
Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, Gratefuled said:

wealthy people are because they usually have armed guards all around them

Come on Grate, be fair, we know you really don't like the Philippines that muh, but just do a fast google and you will find all the rich and famous in the USA who have armed body guards. Being rich and well guarded is not a Philippine only phenomena.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

mogo51
Posted
Posted
23 hours ago, Gratefuled said:

Someone once suggested it. I think it was Daryl Gates former Chief of Police in LA who invented S.W.A.T. 

It was suppose to be made up of responsible citizens who were selected with background checks as well as training with a firearm. They could carry a concealed weapon in public and had the authority to use it to stop and/or prevent a crime. Sort of like undercover law enforcement. 

Seems like a lot of crimes could be prevented and/or stopped since local law enforcement is limited and cannot be everywhere or respond quickly to a crime.

What do you think?

As Old 55 just said, 'Responsible Citizens', would be a bit like finding 'rocking horse whoopsie' IMO.  

We have been seeing how that goes albeit a little bit of a different scenario, with Citizens running around shooting drug dealers?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gratefuled
Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, scott h said:

Come on Grate, be fair, we know you really don't like the Philippines that muh, but just do a fast google and you will find all the rich and famous in the USA who have armed body guards. Being rich and well guarded is not a Philippine only phenomena.

Yes, wealthy Americans do have body guards but not armies of 100 like the Ampatuan Family. There is a difference. No, I do not like the Philippines but for different reasons than you must think. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gratefuled
Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, mogo51 said:

We have been seeing how that goes albeit a little bit of a different scenario, with Citizens running around shooting drug dealers?

Right, those are vigilantes. Kinda like turning the KKK loose to clean up South Central LA or Harlem. 

I've already said that my question was to get a response from contributors. I didn't say I agreed with it. 

Have you ever been in a school or college debate team where a certain topic is addressed and debated both pro and con?

The whole purpose of my question was to "test the waters". I took pro side. I like the responses I've received and it shows how most contributors think about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gratefuled
Posted
Posted

Most Americans are aware of the fat that there are para-military groups in the states. They call themselves "survivalists" They are heavily armed with automatic weapons including 50 Cal, RPGs, and an unlimited supply of ammunition. They have been observed training in remote areas like Lyle Creek area at the foothills of San Bernardino Mountains. 

These are not crime fighters. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mogo51
Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Gratefuled said:

Right, those are vigilantes. Kinda like turning the KKK loose to clean up South Central LA or Harlem. 

I've already said that my question was to get a response from contributors. I didn't say I agreed with it. 

Have you ever been in a school or college debate team where a certain topic is addressed and debated both pro and con?

The whole purpose of my question was to "test the waters". I took pro side. I like the responses I've received and it shows how most contributors think about it.

Yes I have, but I was a young teenager then.  The whole purpose of my response was to show a scenario where a like situation is not working all that well. When does a responsible citizen stop being one and become a 'vigilante' - when he stops being responsible.  That is a 'con' scenario.

I had 16 years in semi military force and I have seen these 'citizen based' groups.  I do not agree that is the answer.  If the military is having problems with an area, increase the military presence and deal with it. IMO.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gratefuled
Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, mogo51 said:

 If the military is having problems with an area, increase the military presence and deal with it. IMO

I was still young during the 1965 Watts Riots but the National Guard put down the rioters quickly by shooting rioters.

A lot of controversy over it. Next time the rioters took to bring and looting, the National Guard just let them go at it and focused on the safety of innocent bystanders. 

So, military presence alone does not prevent crime but action does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gratefuled
Posted
Posted

If someone is really concerned about their safety in the states, one can inquire with the NRA about a local group. 

There is a list of para military groups in every state. They call themselves survivalists. 

I personally do not feel the need to go to the extreme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AlwaysRt
Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, robert k said:

I really hate to make this prediction but within a year, there will probably be a van bomb. Look at this last group. They had a van. They made fake bombs which tells me they wished they had a bomb. Bombs are not that hard to make. It's a progression. 

Bombs are not that hard to make but you still need to make them out of something which is how many are caught before they are used. Much easier to stay hidden renting a van in London than it is to buy 6 - 50 gallon drums of fertilizer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jpbago
Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Gary D said:

it would be like the gun fight at the ok coral. All shooting each other not knowing

In this case, the good guys were wearing black.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...