5 ms·

It's not that hard to arm a society when war breaks out. That is the same mentality that countries like Switzerland has. The "2A argument" is quite a bit differ

by _hypx 5y ago

It's not that hard to arm a society when war breaks out. That is the same mentality that countries like Switzerland has. The "2A argument" is quite a bit different, and has very few similarities with what is going on at the start of a war.

Etherlord87 5y ago
If you give out guns to people who never used them, they won't be as effective. Also I think you're underestimating the logistic difficulty of storing and transporting tens of millions of weapons (and ammunition) before blitzkrieg cuts you off. You could have a storage in each city, but you still need to move the guns to smaller towns and villages, as well as enemy spies could sabotage such transports...
- _hypx 5y ago
  You're trying to rationalize the situation in the US, not looking at it objectively. You can quickly train people to use a firearm, including long before fighting starts. You will need to store a vast amount of military equipment anyways. Storage is highly unlikely to be an issue.
  - gruez 5y ago
    >You can quickly train people to use a firearm, including long before fighting starts. 1. It took months to vaccinate the US population. Training them to use guns would most certainly take longer. 2. Your previous comments seem to suggest you're anti-2A. What's your position here then? Are you against gun ownership, but think that if some enemy wants to invade us, there's going to be enough advance warning that we can train and arm everyone? >Storage is highly unlikely to be an issue. And what about transportation?
    - _hypx 5y ago
      You need close to 100% vaccination rates for vaccines to really work. Not so much for creating a makeshift army. This is an example of framing of the issue, and in this case it is deeply misleading. Nearly everyone wants what makes us safe. The problem is that certain groups in America have transformed that into something dangerous while disguising it as a form of safety. At some point, society will move away from this kind of thinking regardless of how it is perceived today.
  - Etherlord87 5y ago
    Dude, I don't live in the US and I know little about american problems with guns, so no, your guess is a big miss. I'm not trying to rationalize anything, apparently you're the one being heavily biased here, to rush into such conclusions.
- daenz 5y ago
  Not to mention that Switzerland is 15,940 mi², while USA is 3,797,000 mi².
krsdcbl 5y ago
Switzerland is a special case, as everyone who took up military service will be periodically trained until their 40s and keep their arms and equipment at home. In case of mobilization, only ammunition needs to be given out. That does run counter to the "arming a society is easy" take, as specially in Switzerland it's a pretty safe bet that most households do possess weapons, are even required to by law you could say
slater 5y ago
The main issues I have with the (usually US right-wing talking point of) "All Swiss have arms at home!!1~" argument is that, yes, they do, except: a) They don't have any ammo. So, i dunno.. throw your gun at an intruder...? b) Ammo in any case is hard to procure c) If you do your annual military training, the ammo handed out is checked/counted, and woe is you if you can't explain any missing ammo d) You're seen as a near-sociopath weirdo if you brag about "weapons and ammo i have at home" Citation: Spent my first 30 years in CH.

by _hypx 5y ago

Etherlord87 5y ago

If you give out guns to people who never used them, they won't be as effective. Also I think you're underestimating the logistic difficulty of storing and transporting tens of millions of weapons (and ammunition) before blitzkrieg cuts you off. You could have a storage in each city, but you still need to move the guns to smaller towns and villages, as well as enemy spies could sabotage such transports...

_hypx 5y ago
You're trying to rationalize the situation in the US, not looking at it objectively. You can quickly train people to use a firearm, including long before fighting starts. You will need to store a vast amount of military equipment anyways. Storage is highly unlikely to be an issue.
- gruez 5y ago
  >You can quickly train people to use a firearm, including long before fighting starts. 1. It took months to vaccinate the US population. Training them to use guns would most certainly take longer. 2. Your previous comments seem to suggest you're anti-2A. What's your position here then? Are you against gun ownership, but think that if some enemy wants to invade us, there's going to be enough advance warning that we can train and arm everyone? >Storage is highly unlikely to be an issue. And what about transportation?
  - _hypx 5y ago
    You need close to 100% vaccination rates for vaccines to really work. Not so much for creating a makeshift army. This is an example of framing of the issue, and in this case it is deeply misleading. Nearly everyone wants what makes us safe. The problem is that certain groups in America have transformed that into something dangerous while disguising it as a form of safety. At some point, society will move away from this kind of thinking regardless of how it is perceived today.
- Etherlord87 5y ago
  Dude, I don't live in the US and I know little about american problems with guns, so no, your guess is a big miss. I'm not trying to rationalize anything, apparently you're the one being heavily biased here, to rush into such conclusions.
daenz 5y ago
Not to mention that Switzerland is 15,940 mi², while USA is 3,797,000 mi².

krsdcbl 5y ago

Switzerland is a special case, as everyone who took up military service will be periodically trained until their 40s and keep their arms and equipment at home. In case of mobilization, only ammunition needs to be given out. That does run counter to the "arming a society is easy" take, as specially in Switzerland it's a pretty safe bet that most households do possess weapons, are even required to by law you could say

slater 5y ago

The main issues I have with the (usually US right-wing talking point of) "All Swiss have arms at home!!1~" argument is that, yes, they do, except: a) They don't have any ammo. So, i dunno.. throw your gun at an intruder...? b) Ammo in any case is hard to procure c) If you do your annual military training, the ammo handed out is checked/counted, and woe is you if you can't explain any missing ammo d) You're seen as a near-sociopath weirdo if you brag about "weapons and ammo i have at home" Citation: Spent my first 30 years in CH.