2007-07-27 06:19:17 · 9 answers · asked by someone on earth 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
It will be done (and is being done) incrementally, so that there won't be much alarm to incite such a rebellion.
First they regulate a little here, then there, then restrict magazine capacity, then ban a few scary looking guns, then ban small pistols, then... eventually, all that is left is bird-hunting shotguns, not much use for fighting back.
2007-07-27 06:22:26 · answer #1 · answered by speakeasy 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I say if there's a WW3 it is going to likely be sparked by skill of the strikes of North Korea. precise now they're noticeably lots preserving to themselves yet what in the event that they start up up helping the terrorist? i'm noticeably specific usa and that's allies will would desire to combat them. or in line with hazard N Korea will do what Japan did and start up up conquering different countries to tutor that they could be a dominant stress on the international degree. i understand Russia would not precisely have the potential or components they use to yet Russia + Iran + N Korea = a worldwide issue
2016-11-10 09:33:46 · answer #2 · answered by beharry 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Answer: Bill Clinton thought so!
WASHINGTON – The Clinton administration "de-emphasized" fighting Arab international terrorism to focus on domestic terrorism – namely, white "right-wing" militia groups – which led to the FBI ignoring Arab nationals flocking to U.S. flight schools, veteran FBI agents told WorldNetDaily.
Today...Secured in underground vertical PVC tubes, there is enough weapons and ammo to demonstrate a willingness to fight...Arm a third world country as it were!
Ever wonder how Iraqi's that have never had a paying job afford guns, ammo, bombs etc???
The answer then is more SHOULD than could.
2007-07-27 06:36:20 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If it did, I think it'd be a pretty quick war. Are we going to have those with guns fighting those without? Hm...wonder who would win that battle. Are they going to throw stones?
2007-07-27 06:23:41 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, we won't have any guns to fight the civil war with.
2007-07-27 06:21:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, Never. Because no one wants to get rid of the Second Amendment
2007-07-27 06:23:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not if it were successfully enforced, no - rather, you'd see an efficient police state.
2007-07-27 06:22:43 · answer #7 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It will never occur, so it is a moot point.
2007-07-27 06:22:08 · answer #8 · answered by booman17 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
hahahah, and everyone will throw rocks at eachother
2007-07-27 06:23:28 · answer #9 · answered by McCoy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋