tanks vs guns

i met an australian woman in vegas who recently visited sacramento. she told me she met a  guy in sacramento who owned lots of guns. she said the guy was crazy because his reasoning for owning guns was to protect himself from a tyrannical government who have tanks and jet fighters therefore guns will be useless.

i agree the sacramento dude was probably a right wing lunatic. but guns can actually protect the citizens from a tyrannical government. tanks and jet fighters need parts and maintenance. military personnel needs food, clothes, tools, equipment, etc ... not everything can be produced inside a military base. you don't need to fight the tanks and jet fighters. you just need to fight the citizens needed to support the military infrastructure.

but of course if the government loyalists are too many, then the rebels would lose. but if the citizens don't have guns, then it would be easy for a tyrannical government to subdue any rebellion even with only a few loyalists. besides if there are too many government loyalists, then chances are the government is probably not that tyrannical. (this is the same reasoning i use to debunk corporate tyranny. the left's counters that public sentiment has been manufactured using propaganda. we can never really know for sure but it's clear to me the media is just giving people what they want. americans will always try to get what they want. if there is something better than the corporate system, americans will walk over their mother's dead body to get it)

(for more of my knowledge bombs, click the "ian's knowledge bombs" banner at the top of this article and choose any article in the table of contents that piques your interest)