I'll tell you this though southern states like Texas TN GA FL would be nearly impossible to conquer and maintain an occupancy..... too many people are strapped to the fukking teeth with a dozen or more guns and 10,000 rounds of ammo for each caliber. ARs, AKs, high capacity hunting rifles, shotguns, and hanguns. As quiet as it's keep alot are former police or military and some that ain't shoot better than police or military.
What do you think would happen if a group of rogue males did genocide kidnappings and murdered entires villages in places in the us and the police and military wasn't doing their job.
Alot of yall underestimate the role an armed populace has in keeping things in check here in the us and why it would be the most impossible country to occupy and invade.
The United States is the most impossible country to occupy and invade because it has an ocean on either side and one of its borders is fukking Canada.
You know who has the 2nd-most guns per capita compared to the United States? Serbia. You know who is third? Yemen. And Iraq ain't far behind.
All of them in recent history have had massive civil wars with rogue local forces and foreign forces both running all up and down on their ass. And a lot of the locals had MORE firepower than any fukking redneck keeps in his barn.
If you had Nigeria-style or Uganda-style rogue groups doing mass killings in the USA, and the hicks rose up, it would just escalate into a Congo-like or Syria-like situations where there were heavily armed groups fighting on four or five different fronts with different objectives. It wouldn't shut shyt down. If you believe it would, you simply haven't read your history.
The only reason why the us hasn't banned guns or enacted laws like UK or aus is because they know doing that will cause another civil war. The main purpose of the 2nd amendment is to overthrow the government in case they became too corrupted.
Uh, no, it's actually because most of the people don't want it and it would take an overwhelming majority to move against the Constitution. What kind of nonsense are you talking - you think there would be some sort of "ban the guns" executive statement by Obama, if only he wasn't afraid of civil war? You really need to stop reading Alt Right websites.
I call bullshyt on more guns equaling more violence the states with the loosest gun laws have the least violence places like baltimore, Chicago, Detroit, LA with strict gun laws have the worst murders and violence because criminals know people are unarmed your not going to run up in someone's crib in Texas because you know the barrel of a damn AR or shotgun is waiting for your ass. You know your not going to carjack someone in a progun state because they likely have their ccw permit and you might get your head blown off.
Why your talking like Texas isn't above-average in violent crime and gun deaths? And Alaska, Arkansas, Louisiana all be strapped even more than Texas, and they're violent as fukk there.
The most gang-infested cities are obviously going to have high crime. But you're full of shyt on which ones are the worst.
Los Angeles is actually one of the safer big cities. So is New York. Chicago is bad, but not as bad as people say (and most of the guns in Chicago are bought next door in Indiana). The worst cities are New Orleans and Detroit and St. Louis and Baltimore, and in most of those cases they're in states with loose gun laws.
Your bullshyt about people not doing crime in pro-gun states is just that. Bullshyt.
Here is a map of gun ownership by state:
Here is a map of gun deaths by state:
Here is a map of violent crime by state:
Obviously there are some abnormalities (if you live in Wyoming and only see 50 people a day who are all your neighbors, there ain't much fukking chance for violent crime). But for the most part, the more guns a state has, the more violent crime it has and the more gun deaths it has.
