So let’s recap:
1) The U.S. government spies on every online click you make, every app you use, every website you visit, every phone call you make, and has access to all the marketing profile data private companies have collected — in other words, Americans are profiled by their government.
2) The U.S. government considers a paltry 1% (that’s around 3 million) of Americans to be enough of a potential domestic threat that they are on full-time watchlists.
3) The U.S. government instigates and incites some of these individuals to actual crime that, but for government goading, would likely have never occurred.
4) The U.S. government actually insists that it has the right to indefinitely detain you if ‘national security’ appears to be threatened. If the threat is sufficient, there is precedent for the government to drone strike your house without ever giving you a trial.
If I ever disappear from the internet without saying something first, you’ll know why.
Before I crafted the badge I copied all the hi-res pics because I like ‘em
"We need guns as a final bulwark against tyranny!"
Uh, the US military is the most powerful armed force humanity has ever created. They literally have flying killer robots. And you’re arrogant enough to think they’re being stopped in their world domination by a disorganized group of hunters and gun enthusiasts?
YOU’RE NOT THEIR TARGET. THAT’S WHY YOU FEEL SAFE ENOUGH TO BOAST.
The world’s most advanced military has been sent running by a group of farmers with rifles and makeshift bombs. Before the invasions of their respective countries, they had no college education, worked in fields, and lived their lives without modern amenities such as the internet. They’ve killed thousands of well armed, well trained western soldiers, who are supported by aircraft, thermal imaging systems, drones, and armored fighting vehicles. Your average American has a high school, if not college education, disposable income, and can access the world’s biggest information depository with a few keystrokes. See what I’m getting at?
"Oh, but the drones!" you say "You can’t beat drones with a rifle!" wrong again. Drones have pilots, need fuel to operate, run on expensive computer systems, and operate out of a usually stationary base. As the wars in Vietnam, Afghanistan (Both Soviet and American), and Iraq have proven those places are vulnerable to attack. Even then, drones cannot enforce laws, conduct raids, or patrol the streets. You need boots on the ground for that, and when those boots on the ground are afraid that every door they kick down may have a rifle behind it, they may not want to do their jobs as much as they did before.
You seem to have a nonexistent understanding of warfare, since you clearly haven’t heard of something like asymmetric warfare. Combat isn’t always decided by what side has more men or better equipment, as demonstrated by Millennium Challenge 2002, an American combat exercise that ended in the simulated loss of an aircraft carrier, ten cruisers, five of the six amphibious assault ships in the group, and the twenty-thousand military personnel aboard them. How was this done? Well, General Paul Van Riper, the simulated REDFOR commander, disallowed the use of radio and ground-based radar, transmitted messages by motorcycle courier, and launched aircraft using World War Two era signals. American forces suffered further naval ‘losses’ when REDFOR began utilizing small boats to carry out both conventional and suicide attacks. With this loss, the American commanders ‘re-floated’ their ships, and required Van Riper to follow a per-determined script for the exercise, which guaranteed an American victory.
What Millennium Challenge 2002 showed was that a far less advanced, though tactically proficient group could cripple a modern fighting force. Even without organization or a central supply chain the Taliban have killed thousands of coalition soldiers and crushed any desire for war much of America and Europe’s populace has left, not to mention the overall monetary cost of the conflict.
As for the inevitable “TANKS BHURR” comment, tanks aren’t worth shit in an urban environment. During the first Chechen War, the Russians lost 10% of their tank forces, primarily modern T-72/T-80s in the city of Grozny alone. Remember what a tank is; a slow, heavy vehicle designed for destroying other tanks and providing fire support to infantry in an open environment. Cities are not open environments, and even with small arms and makeshift bombs a tank’s outer equipment can be damaged. Without infantry support in an urban environment, a tank is a coffin covered in composite steel armor and RHA.
Discounting an insurgency simply because the military is technologically advanced and large is a massive tactical mistake. Good luck flying drones when their pilots are being killed or kidnapped on their way to work, and their hardware is being bombed or sabotaged. Good luck running tanks when their tracks are being blown off by makeshift bombs and their expensive thermal cameras are being shot to pieces.
tl;dr don’t make comments about asymmetric warfare unless you know what you’re talking about.
TIHK is a patent pending handcuff key that utilizes an integrated clip for easy attachment to your clothing so it is ready when needed. Its minimal, low-profile design and low-visibility coating ensure that it can be carried inconspicuously and go undetected when detained. Designed to fit all standard “peerless” style handcuffs.
Although it’s no secret that RFID is easily hacked (see: train passes, passports, credit cards, one billion other cards, etc.) it’s still not necessarily common knowledge, and it sounds like the major credit card companies want to keep it that way — according to Adam Savage, Mythbusters was all set to do a show exposing the weak security behind most RFID implementations but was shut down by lawyers from “American Express, Visa, Discover, and everybody else… [who] absolutely made it really clear to Discovery that they were not going to air this episode.” Since Discovery is an ad-supported channel, it’s not surprising that it backed down, but we’d say that the credit card industry would be far better served spending money on actually improving security rather than lawyering up and trying to keep consumers in the dark.