http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJDMYhcRMzw

or this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping_of_Colleen_Stan

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23768978)

if a tactical team from the feds goes in there with the expectation that you'll fight back, they go in very heavy and don't give you much of a chance to do much of anything.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23769045)

hell, the ruby ridge doods were going at it with the FBI, the Marshalls and special forces doods and they popped one

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23769053)

guns are fine, but the point is, the notion that civilian firearms will somehow "keep the government in line" is just not evident at all from actual police conduct in america. if they are scared of civilian firepower and are thus constrained in their actions, it really doesn't show.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23769089)

on an individual level sure, but truly widespread problems potentially free up citizens to start popping sheriffs and stuff, swat doesn't really do much and the FBI can only handle a few incidences at once

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23769104)

and if you confining yourself to militia types only you're missing most of the survivalist doods

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23769298)

one decent natural disaster, or any number of other scenarios, is perfectly likely and if not confined to a small enough area can result in not so good stuff, do you think cops were confiscating guns during Katrina because they were doing such a great job maintaining the social order?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23769331)

The part where your premise - "it's inevitable" - merely restates your conclusion - "it's inevitable."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23769404)

Furthermore, when there have been collapses there have been factors that caused then. They weren't just spontaneous events.

In order to argue that the USA in the 21st century is headed for any kind of collapse, you have to show that at least some of those factors are present. You haven't done that.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23769421)

and droughts, famines, and plagues were pretty common, we've certainly increased out ability to fight that but the idea that we're perfectly safe is silly and given the consequences it isn't irrational to take even a small chance pretty seriously

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23769432)

This is just sophistry. Was WWII a good time to be a survivalist in Ohio just because that was not a "period of peace?"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23769674)

South Africa seems like a good country to look at for social breakdown and the effectiveness of being armed. It appears that being well armed has helped some of the whites there.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23773774)

you seem to be saying they're irrational just because they aren't 100% assured of victory and in fact would probably lose in most instances, that doesn't really make sense

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23769253)

and once again, the likelihood of this certainly would affect any sort of plans for the kind of nationwide confiscation they're worried about, there is a reason gun control advocates are really hesitant to talk about confiscation and it isn't because they don't want to remove guns, these guys are, day to day, actually affecting how we talk about policy

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23769348)

plus you've not addressed the other point, re the deterrent effect of an unknown number of these doods being out there

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23769400)

Are you somehow less dead because you killed a cop? If you just surrendered without a fight would you be more dead?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23769411)

You seem to think it's enough to kill a few cops before you go down in a hail of bullets, but when I survey the justifications put forth by 2nd amendment advocates, killing cops just for the sake of killing cops doesn't seem to be a common one.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23769454)

and getting killed imposes a cost on the government, namely having to kill a couple thousand citizens is really bad pr and can potentially jump start backlash

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2327027&forum_id=2)#23769461)