When it comes to proposing firearm ownership as a deterrent to state tyranny, one must keep in mind:

You don't survive gun battles. Your unit survives gun battles. Sometimes it's because you're covering each other's backs effectively, so most or all of you survive. Other times you're doing your best and the dice roll wrong, and your unit survives specifically because you don't.

If you can't handle the idea of working as a team, moving as a team, and thinking as a team, then likely as not you can't handle the idea of dying FOR the team, and you really shouldn't be going to war, especially not with firearms. They were invented for use in teams, and even after the technology developed to allow a single shooter to actually have a chance of hitting something, even after rifling and percussion caps and magazines and scopes -- after all that, it still takes a team, using a lot of cover fire, to take down armed enemies. You still can't just walk out there with a rifle and a pistol and lay waste to everybody who's shooting back at you. You can't do it alone.

Unfortunately there are a fair few folks who didn't get the memo. People who watch too many action movies and wind up thinking of war as a quest for personal glory above all. These are the sort of people who buy lots of extraneous tactical gear, and stick it all on their person, and wind up looking like idiots, because those bits of gear are meant to be spread among a unit.

This sort of one-man-army is to a war what a one-man-band is to an orchestra. Cute, but definitely not getting the actual job done.

Log in or register to write something here or to contact authors.