The Sanctuary
Society => Weapons & Combat => Topic started by: Arnox on November 06, 2014, 01:17:54 am
-
So the military and the police and even some of the alphabet agencies (DHS comes to mind) have been ramping up their technology pretty steadily now. And for the military, that is definitely to be expected.
But one thing that keeps crossing my mind is, what if all these vehicles and equipment and weapons are used against us one day? What are some ways we can combat such things?
For example, this lovely device here. (http://www.wired.com/2009/11/new-bomb-resistant-trucks-will-blast-rpgs-before-they-hit/) How can we get past this? Better armor perhaps on RPG rounds?
-
Thats an interesting defense system... honestly though in the event those weapons are turned against us we would be fucked for lack of a better term. on an upside if that were the case how many military personnel do you think would defect and join the people? cops would likely slaughter citezens like they already do but i feel like alot of the military has a bit of a different mindset more than likely we"d end up with a few of these ourselves
-
what if all these vehicles and equipment and weapons are used against us one day? What are some ways we can combat such things?
Not "if" instead "when". :(
The militarization of a lot of police departments is not by accident, as many communities are gearing when up martial law will eventually be declared. How can we fight it? At this point, as soft as the populace is and as complacent have people been while our rights have gotten whittled away little by little over the last several decades....we've already crossed the point of no return.
The only true way to "fight back" is focusing on the numbers game, kinda like Ewoks vs. Stormtroopers. But in the end that still doesn't matter, because we are such a soft society and not enough people are willing to put their own lives on the line i as collateral damage. We are conditioned from the moment we leave the womb to just obey/submit, and not enough renegades exist to put their own comfort levels aside to end the tyranny and eventual worse oppression the next several generations with inevitably suffer.
-
At this point, as soft as the populace is
Ah, but that's what they want you to think. Contrary to popular belief, there are a lot of good people in this country. People willing to stand up for their rights. If we all keep thinking that the enemy is undefeatable for whatever reason though, then they will have won a very important victory. Probably the most important of all. Taking away the will to fight. Not fighting because one feels it's hopeless is a pretty darn defeatist attitude.
I mean, just look how much they did in the Ukraine when Russia was moving in and etc. It was not that big of a group honestly and they still had a MASSIVE influence. And with today's electronic society, it has never been easier to reach others with your actions, no matter how indirectly.
Thats an interesting defense system... honestly though in the event those weapons are turned against us we would be fucked for lack of a better term. on an upside if that were the case how many military personnel do you think would defect and join the people? cops would likely slaughter citezens like they already do but i feel like alot of the military has a bit of a different mindset more than likely we"d end up with a few of these ourselves
Indeed. I brought up that same point in an earlier thread as well. But one mustn't assume things will go well at all. It's best to plan for the worst case scenario for obvious reasons. We should assume that manpower will be few in number. Now, with a fully-featured 3D printer, I definitely think ones options would open up a lot more. With such, all one would need are some plans to put into the computer and all the materials and boom. Full access to any technology you can salvage.
-
what if all these vehicles and equipment and weapons are used against us one day? What are some ways we can combat such things?
because we are such a soft society and not enough people are willing to put their own lives on the line as collateral damage.
You have a good point but once the shit does hit the proverbial fan, I think it'll be a bigger reaction from the people than you'd expect. I could be wrong though we do live in a country filled with mindless idiots; sheep ready to be herded
-
At this point, as soft as the populace is
Full access to any technology we can salvage.
But you still have to realize, anything we can create, uncle sam probably has some sort of defense system to counter it. I'd fight it out regardless. Rather be a martyr than a slave.
-
anything we can create, uncle sam probably has some sort of defense system to counter it.
The government isn't all-knowing and perfect. Iraq is a perfect example. We went in there with equipment not suited to desert warfare at all and vehicles that were HIGHLY vulnerable to road-planted IEDs and were for a while.
-
Indeed. I brought up that same point in an earlier thread as well. But one mustn't assume things will go well at all. It's best to plan for the worst case scenario for obvious reasons. We should assume that manpower will be few in number. Now, with a fully-featured 3D printer, I definitely think ones options would open up a lot more. With such, all one would need are some plans to put into the computer and all the materials and boom. Full access to any technology we can salvage.
3d-printing is more or less irrelevant for weapons, much less weapons for war or sustained use. The only non-single-shot firearm I've seen printed was a 1911 printed out of a metal powder scintering 'printer', which took several months and cost upwards of $6k. for precision manufacture, you'd need a decent C&C machine and a good knowledge of how to use it. in desperate times, take a page out of the Chechens' book - you can make a gun out of pretty much anything, as long as you can get bullets. corner one of them in his room and he'll make a submachinegun out of the bedframe.
specific to the US though, I have no idea if that'd help in a suppression/martial law situation. police offices get ex-military equipment close to free when the military hits surplus or equipment no longer meets their requirements. I read about a university in San Francisco that bought their campus security team a humvee with anti-IED measures because they could get it for like 2k, and police departments buying up rocket launchers and other heavy weapons.
some people believe that it's a planned method to work around habeas corpus; arming the police with military equipment so that the military don't need to be deployed against the domestic populace, but in reality it's more just a result of extremely irresponsible and excessive defense contracting. I doubt that police would be able to enact large-scale (see: nationwide) suppression operations even in they wanted to, and I suspect that without the conditioning and training the military are subject to, many would simply turn in their uniforms if the alphabet agencies told them to use widespread lethal force.
I'll come back later if this thread is still going; I wanted to write something about the trend of modern weapons trying to reduce accountability and distance the user from actual murder (see: drone operators), but ldap is giving me cancer
-
Ah, but that's what they want you to think. Contrary to popular belief, there are a lot of good people in this country. People willing to stand up for their rights. If we all keep thinking that the enemy is undefeatable for whatever reason though, then they will have won a very important victory. Probably the most important of all. Taking away the will to fight. Not fighting because one feels it's hopeless is a pretty darn defeatist attitude.
I mean, just look how much they did in the Ukraine when Russia was moving in and etc. It was not that big of a group honestly and they still had a MASSIVE influence. And with today's electronic society, it has never been easier to reach others with your actions, no matter how indirectly.
You are being very idealistic thinking the populace will "band together" in a true martial law scenario. First and foremost, depending on how far the government would want to take it, they could turn off the internet (or greatly filter it) with the push of a few buttons. Taking it even further, if they turned off basic energies like electricity and gas....people would end up preying on each other for the most basic resources....food, potable water, shelter, etc. There would be little effort involved in going after the government "unified", as basic human necessities would trump any political ideology or oppression.
Getting back to weapons though, the fact is....there very much IS technological devices out there that we have pretty much no way to defend ourselves against. Ever hear of an LRAD? Its a Long Range Acoustic Device, and more and more police departments are equipping their tactical vehicles with them. This isn't a conventional weapon of any sort, and there is no fighting it if they decide to send a sonic blast at the masses or just individuals. Even 10,000 of the most hardened, brazen, and badass people storming city hall all at once can't "fight" something like that....and there is a lot of beliefs out there it can very easily kill people en masse if they just turned up the charge/frequency.
The days of building a militia with conventional weapons and bullets may sound great in theory, but because of all the technological advancements of the world we are living in....the military/government literally has us as powerless and weak as the slaves we already are.
-
Ah, but that's what they want you to think. Contrary to popular belief, there are a lot of good people in this country. People willing to stand up for their rights. If we all keep thinking that the enemy is undefeatable for whatever reason though, then they will have won a very important victory. Probably the most important of all. Taking away the will to fight. Not fighting because one feels it's hopeless is a pretty darn defeatist attitude.
I mean, just look how much they did in the Ukraine when Russia was moving in and etc. It was not that big of a group honestly and they still had a MASSIVE influence. And with today's electronic society, it has never been easier to reach others with your actions, no matter how indirectly.
You are being very idealistic thinking the populace will "band together" in a true martial law scenario. First and foremost, depending on how far the government would want to take it, they could turn off the internet (or greatly filter it) with the push of a few buttons. Taking it even further, if they turned off basic energies like electricity and gas....people would end up preying on each other for the most basic resources....food, potable water, shelter, etc. There would be little effort involved in going after the government "unified", as basic human necessities would trump any political ideology or oppression.
Getting back to weapons though, the fact is....there very much IS technological devices out there that we have pretty much no way to defend ourselves against. Ever hear of an LRAD? Its a Long Range Acoustic Device, and more and more police departments are equipping their tactical vehicles with them. This isn't a conventional weapon of any sort, and there is no fighting it if they decide to send a sonic blast at the masses or just individuals. Even 10,000 of the most hardened, brazen, and badass people storming city hall all at once can't "fight" something like that....and there is a lot of beliefs out there it can very easily kill people en masse if they just turned up the charge/frequency.
The days of building a militia with conventional weapons and bullets may sound great in theory, but because of all the technological advancements of the world we are living in....the military/government literally has us as powerless and weak as the slaves we already are.
Those LRAD's are highly overrated. Their big weakness is that they obviously only work in the direction they're pointed in. And all it takes is a well-placed missile right into that sensitive dish to mess it all up. Heck, not even that perhaps. Maybe a simple high caliber rifle of some sort will take care of it. Might need a couple AP rounds but I'm sure one could get the job done.
As to people, yes, I'm sure there will be some violent people but Ferguson has taught us that the sensible people outnumber those who will attack others to get what they want. Not only that, they're disorganized and as such, are easily rounded up. A few lone people against a coordinated group of three will be hard pressed to resist such to say the least.
And c'mon now. Look at ALL the prison riots in history. People up against heavily armed guards with nothing but a darn shiv. Do not underestimate people.
-
guerrilla warfare has a funny way of making technology meaningless.
look at Vietnam. technologically speaking, that should have been a flat out slaughter...but it wasn't.
a fight on the streets of the US would NOT be clean, anyone who could set up a decent booby trap would run around setting up dozens, IEDs would still be rampant, and I KNOW all the redneck firepower and veterans wouldn't stand by and let this happen.
if it was a flat out fight, it would be extremely messy for everyone involved.
as to the device posted in OP, that still won't stop a buried 55 gallon drum of diesel and fertilizer. and honestly, how many RPGs have you just seen in civilian hands?
-
look at Vietnam. technologically speaking, that should have been a flat out slaughter...but it wasn't.
Wow. I can't believe I forgot about that. Yeah, this though.
-
Those LRAD's are highly overrated. Their big weakness is that they obviously only work in the direction they're pointed in. And all it takes is a well-placed missile right into that sensitive dish to mess it all up. Heck, not even that perhaps. Maybe a simple high caliber rifle of some sort will take care of it. Might need a couple AP rounds but I'm sure one could get the job done.
As to people, yes, I'm sure there will be some violent people but Ferguson has taught us that the sensible people outnumber those who will attack others to get what they want. Not only that, they're disorganized and as such, are easily rounded up. A few lone people against a coordinated group of three will be hard pressed to resist such to say the least.
And c'mon now. Look at ALL the prison riots in history. People up against heavily armed guards with nothing but a darn shiv. Do not underestimate people.
You talk about "firing a missile" and acquiring RPGs with such nonchalance, but in the real world getting your hands on such weaponry is very difficult for anyone not in the military or part of a government entity. And I guess we'll have to disagree on the abilities of an LRAD, but try to remember usually what the government tells us about whatever technologies potential is just the tip of the iceberg as they aren't giving away all their secrets.
In regard to bringing up Ferguson, I'm not sure why you brought that up.....because you just proved my point perfectly. You had a "united populace".....with a sense of one common goal outraged at a social injustice. And despite all of their numbers, exactly what happened? Order was restored by the military and police, not because they had the numbers.....but because they had the weaponry, technology and the system quelling the "cause".
-
LRAD isn't so much a weapon as a very very loud noisemaker; it'd be most useful to disrupt target groups or harass individuals. it doesn't have much of a lethal capacity though, and can largely be defeated with earplugs.
in that vein I'd be much more worried about 'dazzlers' and microwave emitters - the former being high-powered lasers aimed at eye level with the intent to cause temporary (but often causing permanent) blindness, and the latter being exactly what it sounds like... extreme discomfort with the sensation of being cooked, with any metal jewelry or zippers burning into your skin, and quite likely causing cancers and tumors in the long term.
-
look at Vietnam. technologically speaking, that should have been a flat out slaughter...but it wasn't.
Wow. I can't believe I forgot about that. Yeah, this though.
It is very hard to argue that the US has won a ground war since WW2.
Unless our military is willing to start going things how the Izzy's do them, Rifle's, ammo, men, and money are all that is needed
-
Those LRAD's are highly overrated. Their big weakness is that they obviously only work in the direction they're pointed in. And all it takes is a well-placed missile right into that sensitive dish to mess it all up. Heck, not even that perhaps. Maybe a simple high caliber rifle of some sort will take care of it. Might need a couple AP rounds but I'm sure one could get the job done.
As to people, yes, I'm sure there will be some violent people but Ferguson has taught us that the sensible people outnumber those who will attack others to get what they want. Not only that, they're disorganized and as such, are easily rounded up. A few lone people against a coordinated group of three will be hard pressed to resist such to say the least.
And c'mon now. Look at ALL the prison riots in history. People up against heavily armed guards with nothing but a darn shiv. Do not underestimate people.
You talk about "firing a missile" and acquiring RPGs with such nonchalance, but in the real world getting your hands on such weaponry is very difficult for anyone not in the military or part of a government entity. And I guess we'll have to disagree on the abilities of an LRAD, but try to remember usually what the government tells us about whatever technologies potential is just the tip of the iceberg as they aren't giving away all their secrets.
In regard to bringing up Ferguson, I'm not sure why you brought that up.....because you just proved my point perfectly. You had a "united populace".....with a sense of one common goal outraged at a social injustice. And despite all of their numbers, exactly what happened? Order was restored by the military and police, not because they had the numbers.....but because they had the weaponry, technology and the system quelling the "cause".
Opportunistic rioters aren't really dedicated to their "cause", and lack any form of discipline.....
(http://media4.onsugar.com/files/2014/01/06/002/n/1922283/26a420cfbaf5460f_image.png.xxxlarge.jpg)
The events at the Bundy Ranch are a much better example of armed Americans taking a stand, than anything that's happened in Furgadishu
-
Indeed. I brought up that same point in an earlier thread as well. But one mustn't assume things will go well at all. It's best to plan for the worst case scenario for obvious reasons. We should assume that manpower will be few in number. Now, with a fully-featured 3D printer, I definitely think ones options would open up a lot more. With such, all one would need are some plans to put into the computer and all the materials and boom. Full access to any technology we can salvage.
3d-printing is more or less irrelevant for weapons, much less weapons for war or sustained use. The only non-single-shot firearm I've seen printed was a 1911 printed out of a metal powder scintering 'printer', which took several months and cost upwards of $6k. for precision manufacture, you'd need a decent C&C machine and a good knowledge of how to use it. in desperate times, take a page out of the Chechens' book - you can make a gun out of pretty much anything, as long as you can get bullets. corner one of them in his room and he'll make a submachinegun out of the bedframe.
specific to the US though, I have no idea if that'd help in a suppression/martial law situation. police offices get ex-military equipment close to free when the military hits surplus or equipment no longer meets their requirements. I read about a university in San Francisco that bought their campus security team a humvee with anti-IED measures because they could get it for like 2k, and police departments buying up rocket launchers and other heavy weapons.
some people believe that it's a planned method to work around habeas corpus; arming the police with military equipment so that the military don't need to be deployed against the domestic populace, but in reality it's more just a result of extremely irresponsible and excessive defense contracting. I doubt that police would be able to enact large-scale (see: nationwide) suppression operations even in they wanted to, and I suspect that without the conditioning and training the military are subject to, many would simply turn in their uniforms if the alphabet agencies told them to use widespread lethal force.
I'll come back later if this thread is still going; I wanted to write something about the trend of modern weapons trying to reduce accountability and distance the user from actual murder (see: drone operators), but ldap is giving me cancer
:o
CNC.....computer numerical control
-
yeah, sorry, dunno why I typed that
-
Yea.. but this isn't exactly civil war days, we may be able to win a ground war... but what do you do when there is a drone firing laser guided missles at your ass??? i wouldn't jump right out and say we would have no chance but it would definitely be one hell of a fight. I mentioned that you'd have to account for the military forces that would defect and fight for the people, given thats not promised but more than likely; we would end up with some of that technology ourselves. Now we may have a few pieces of military weaponry here and there but would that really help against the hundreds, more than likely thousands of the same things they have stockpilied? I think the best question here is do you think they were smart enough to put in countermeasures against their own weaponry? Drones, Tanks, Armored personnel carriers etc.??? all that shit has some flaw somewhere in it
-
Yea.. but this isn't exactly civil war days, we may be able to win a ground war... but what do you do when there is a drone firing laser guided missles at your ass??? i wouldn't jump right out and say we would have no chance but it would definitely be one hell of a fight. I mentioned that you'd have to account for the military forces that would defect and fight for the people, given thats not promised but more than likely; we would end up with some of that technology ourselves. Now we may have a few pieces of military weaponry here and there but would that really help against the hundreds, more than likely thousands of the same things they have stockpilied? I think the best question here is do you think they were smart enough to put in countermeasures against their own weaponry? Drones, Tanks, Armored personnel carriers etc.??? all that shit has some flaw somewhere in it
while air superiority is very good in conventional wars like drones and jets and bombs in non traditional conflicts they are not as reliable a drone can't stand on a street corner and provide a "presence" they are very good for strikes not so much for maintaining control. Also there are always very good counters for tanks and APC's IED's and simple things like Molotov's can choke up the engine on a tank and you would be surprised how many small arms rounds go through APC's. You do ave a point fighting would be up hill but non traditional combat is very hard to counter the goal of an occupied people is not to win it is to make it too costly and morale burning to stay
-
That falls back to the argument of how many complacent people there would already be, the "control" would be there in some way. then there would be hot spots where every one is revolting, you dont think they would loose a couple missles? wiping out a town or a city can be done with the push of a button
Now the costly and morale burning part i agree with completely thats exactly how the us got fucked in vietnam. i feel as though that'd be very possible here since it would for the most part be guerilla warfare
-
That falls back to the argument of how many complacent people there would already be, the "control" would be there in some way. then there would be hot spots where every one is revolting, you dont think they would loose a couple missles? wiping out a town or a city can be done with the push of a button
Now the costly and morale burning part i agree with completely thats exactly how the us got fucked in vietnam. i feel as though that'd be very possible here since it would for the most part be guerilla warfare
Vietnam was not fought as a conventional war.
If it was it would have been over in less than a year.
Eg, Phoenix Program. If that had been implemented years before it was, attacks north of the DMZ were conventional, and the action was more military minded rather than police minded with military tactics, the communists would have been wiped out very, very quickly.
-
the same way the sand people do. daisy chained ieds, and fire lots of fire. but if the air force gets involved at all our lack of access to anti aircraft weaponry would leave us all vulnerable as fuck. maybe some rudimentary homemade shape charged shoulder fired rockets. numbers is the only way we would stand a chance. unity of the people is necessary for guerrilla warfare to be practical or applicable. we need a rifle behind every blade of grass along with help from a foreign power. someone who could help regulate the attack and arm and provide logistics to the rebels. without that resistance would be fruitless.
-
guerrilla warfare has a funny way of making technology meaningless.
look at Vietnam. technologically speaking, that should have been a flat out slaughter...but it wasn't.
Pretty much this, When I worked in Afghanistan as a civi I got to hear alot of what went on.
The US started to use cell phone jammers to stop IEDs so the locals just started using fishing line, They'd have kids bury mines where troops usually did foot patrols, other odds and ends that never really hit the news but most of what was done was unconventional warfare not held down by any law outside of what a person will do and what a person can do.
The military is accountable by the Geneva convention, You as an individual fighter or guerrilla warrior are not.
The worse part being if there was a civil war it's next to near impossible to figure out who's your enemy and who's your friend being in the regular forces where as a nonmilitary combatant you'll have targets galore if you're smart about it.
the same way the sand people do. daisy chained ieds, and fire lots of fire. but if the air force gets involved at all our lack of access to anti aircraft weaponry would leave us all vulnerable as fuck. maybe some rudimentary homemade shape charged shoulder fired rockets. numbers is the only way we would stand a chance. unity of the people is necessary for guerrilla warfare to be practical or applicable. we need a rifle behind every blade of grass along with help from a foreign power. someone who could help regulate the attack and arm and provide logistics to the rebels. without that resistance would be fruitless.
I was going to say use the IEDs to set off their counter measures first then use a RPG or some home made device, Other options being controlled demolition of buildings and bridges... Drop a building or a bridge on a tank and it's gunna have a bad day.
As for someone mentioning setting the back of a tank on fire to get the engine to snuff out... Maybe in WW2, Modern tanks have taken it into consideration and it takes a little more than a small fire to put them out of commission... You want a tank to have a bad day? Convert a storm sewer into one huge mother of a remote detonated mine and use the heavy iron lid to attempt to "punch through" the belly of the beast or to flip it and render it unable to be used in combat.
Option B, Go to Africa. Get some Ebola samples and rotate it into the chow huts and other areas that the military will frequent.
Even cheaper alternatives are "toe tappers" small landmines made out of 12 gauge shells to take off a foot. Ect.
Al
-
I think an important thing to note is the difference between the goal of an insurgency vs that of a conventional army. Yes, a bunch of armed peasants probably can't take out drones, helicopters, ICBMS, etc. HOWEVER drones don't enforce curfews, helicopters don't drag political prisoners out of their homes in the middle of the night, and ICBMS don't loot supplies from businesses. Boots on the ground do that, and lots and lots of people with rifles are still good against those.
You're not trying to "win" the war. You're trying to survive and disrupt it. You can't beat a conventional army, but you can make it so goddamn expensive (in terms of money, blood, or morale) that they can't be there.
I have no illusions of "overthrowing the government" in the event of tyranny or occupation. I aim to protect my family, friends, and neighbors (and their sovereignty) from those scenarios. That to me is the 21st-century niche of the Second Amendment, and probably the most realistic goal of an armed citizen insurgency.
-
I think an important thing to note is the difference between the goal of an insurgency vs that of a conventional army. Yes, a bunch of armed peasants probably can't take out drones, helicopters, ICBMS, etc. HOWEVER drones don't enforce curfews, helicopters don't drag political prisoners out of their homes in the middle of the night, and ICBMS don't loot supplies from businesses. Boots on the ground do that, and lots and lots of people with rifles are still good against those.
You're not trying to "win" the war. You're trying to survive and disrupt it. You can't beat a conventional army, but you can make it so goddamn expensive (in terms of money, blood, or morale) that they can't be there.
I have no illusions of "overthrowing the government" in the event of tyranny or occupation. I aim to protect my family, friends, and neighbors (and their sovereignty) from those scenarios. That to me is the 21st-century niche of the Second Amendment, and probably the most realistic goal of an armed citizen insurgency.
Step 1.
Enforce curfew
Step 2.
Armoured vehicles
Step 3.
House by house, street by street. Search/detain
Step 4.
Resist and be treated as a enemy combatant and get killed. Be outside when curfew is in place and get killed.
-
nvm