If you missed this at the dozens of other conservative blogs that have posted it in the last few days, make time. (If you can’t spare seven minutes, Blog O’ Stuff has the transcript.)
One gun-control argument I’ve always had trouble understanding, never more so than now, is the idea that millions of citizens armed with pistols and rifles as a bulwark against tyranny might as well give those weapons up because they’re no match for a modern military with tanks and planes.
Really? Since when is guerrilla warfare a sure loser, even against a sophisticated, well-equipped army? Until the Awakening changed the dynamic in Anbar province, Iraqi Sunnis were doing okay holding out against the world’s hyperpower. The Taliban crawls on to this day after 11 years of war in Afghanistan and may well end up back in control once the Obama finally gives up and withdraws.
The point of Petraeus-style counterinsurgency doctrine, I thought, is that even the most well-trained, well-equipped force can’t pacify a population through brute strength. It’s one thing to believe worrying about martial law here is silly, it’s another to believe that an attempt at martial law would inevitably succeed.
After you watch this, head over to Legal Insurrection and watch a veteran speak up for the Second Amendment at a town hall in Illinois.