Quote:
Originally Posted by Legbreaker
An explanation of the apparent lack of weaponry in US civilian hands may be either a tightening of Laws during the early years of the war, or a call for weapons, any weapons for the soldiers to train with.
|
I find the legal explanation somewhat unlikely, Leg. One of the arguments that the anti-gun side uses in American politics is the theory that the Second Amendment - the element of our Constitution that addresses the right to keep and bear arms - applies to militias but not individuals. With incipient civil unrest, Division Cuba, and Soviets in Alaska, I believe you'd see widespread formation of militias on the state and county levels. That action would render the anti-gun political arguments somewhat irrelevant.
I also suspect any mass attempt at confiscation would fail horribly, not from organized resistance and rebellion so much as a general lack of enthusiasm for compliance or enforcement. Federal troops and law enforcement would have more pressing agendas, so you'd see a few high-profile busts of survivalists for press consumption and little else. Much of the burden would fall on local officials, and the locales in which they'd most aggressively pursue confiscation would be the areas with the fewest guns to begin with (due to existing anti-gun conditions).
Of the scenarios you present, I think the mob assault is the most likely. Ironically, this is one of the core arguments of the present-day resurgent survivalist ("prepper") movement, which substitutes "zombies" as a convenient shorthand for "aggressive, panicked neighbors who want your supplies."
- C.