More info:
I was studying tonight at a restaurant and overheard a woman talking about her daughter in Santa Cruz. She said that "the military" (her daughter probably woudln't know the difference bewteen military and LEO) was practicing urban warfare right in her daughter's neighborhood. House to house movement and searches (?) were part of the practice.
She was not into the details, just the fear of it all and the fact that her daughter was freaked out. She mentioned that it is a big stink there and huge protests are going on but funny thing is, it has never gotten on the news. This is only a few hours from me but the first I have heard of it.
This is more heresay, and just like the above post, it claims to be from first-hand source.
I take it all with a grain of salt, but the question is: what exactly are they practicing so heavily for? So far this is the fourth report of this kind of thing I have heard about, in five different cities. There is definitly a reason for this influx of this type of training. I hope that it is only in the case of rioting. But, why are they practicing door-to-door searches, and why are agencies like the ATF involved? The ATF's job description does not include quelling riots....
Okay, so I am not jumping on the bandwagon either and I am not yet convinced that the "gubment is out to get us and they are going to use the y2k as an excuse to take our weapons". BUT, this kind of activity and the sudden influx of it has got to at least make you say "Hmmm...".
At the very least, they sure are training hard for riots. They must be pretty convinced that the urban areas could get very chaotic.
I have to sadly say that if weapons confiscations were the order, that I don't think that most people would put up a fight, honestly, if the gov't used their usual mind-numbing tactics coupled with some scare tactics as well. They seem to be very good at programming the American public to believe that whatever they are doing is "for our good", and at the same time, the few that don't buy it don't want to go to jail.
Think about the scenario: the gov't has most people convinced that taking away guns would be a good idea. They come to your neighborhood and start going door to door. By far MOST people are not going to resist and face the repercussions. The few that want to resist are not going to want to be the first, because they don't know if they are alone and they don't want to be the scapegoat.
Are YOU going to be the first to pull the trigger? When? When they go into your neighbor's home or when they get to yours? When you start firing, are you going to get any help from your neighbors or are they going to decide to keep quiet and let you burn? If the people immediatly around your house don't help, you are SOL and will be surrounded. Unless at least half of the people in a given neighborhood resist, they will fall, just thinking of the dynamics of it all.
Fact is, only a sparse few people would actually fire on any Official who tried to take their guns, especially after some good old media programming.
In San Francisco the city outlawed weapons told everyone to turn in there guns. I laughed and thought it was a joke. I never thought I would see the day, but the people did! I believe that the American public as a whole is much weaker than we think, because most of our friends are not the average American.
The agencies can take on the few, strong, prepared, resistant people one by one. Surround one resistant house at a time, gas the inside, cut off food and water, or if all else burn them to the ground and make a public display of it. No one after that will resist.
I really think that all this "If they come for my guns they will get the bullets first" mentality is wishful thinking. Fact is, most people will be scared to death and just comply. The few that don't will burn one at a time.
thaddeus
Also, the emergency pack in my vehicle's trunk would qualify in most eyes as an arsenal. That's the purpose of the three handguns in the passenger compartment: get to the trunk.