PDA

View Full Version : LIBYA - Would 2A rights have helped them?


bubbapug1
03-23-2011, 11:34 AM
When I watch the news events unfold about Libya and the rest of the area I wonder, would 2A gun rights have helped the whole region be more secure and free the last century, and would 2A rights in Libya in general have helped the masses overthrow ghadaffi.

I am not sure, tanks versus AR15's is not very even, but than again, maybe things wouldn't have been so one sided for so long.

I am curious to find out what other members think.

Big Ben
03-23-2011, 11:40 AM
I have no idea what the 2A rights are or have historically been in Libya, but the images that I see of rebels seem to show that they are generally armed with AK style rifles. Not sure if this is due to the previous availability of weapons in Libya, or the result of the rebels having captured military armories/bases, but in either case, I don't think possession of small arms is going to carry the day for the rebels.

Unfortunately for the rebels, military weapons (tanks/helicopters, not rifles), training, and tactics are all on the side of the gov't. It certainly doesn't seem to bode well for the rebels.

Kid Stanislaus
03-23-2011, 11:43 AM
Unfortunately for the rebels, military weapons (tanks/helicopters, not rifles), training, and tactics are all on the side of the gov't.

Unfortunately for Ghaddafi's troops, allied aircraft can knock the snot out of their armoured forces at will.

10001110101
03-23-2011, 12:12 PM
IMO, if they'd had 2A rights in the first place it would have not gotten this far. Ghaddafi would not have been able to become the despot he is since a large amount of his power came from fear.

nicki
03-23-2011, 12:33 PM
Ghadfi should be our poster child of why we need the 2nd amendment.

When only the government has guns and criminals get control of the govenment, you now are helpless against both common and official criminals.

Perhaps someone can get copies of our declaration of independence, a copy of our constitution/bill of rights with improvements.

a. Fixed taxing authority
b. Fixed Commerce Clause
c. 2x4 clear purpose for the 2nd amendment.

Nicki

bigstick61
03-23-2011, 5:17 PM
It should be noted that Libyans already could own guns and there were nearly a million legally owned private arms in the country when the whole thing started. Many of the early fights involved Libyans who were armed with various sporting weapons with the occasional military weapon mixed in. Even in recent pictures you still can find quite a few Libyans armed with breech-loading (single or double barrel), pump-action, or bolt-action sporting rifles and shotguns, a few handguns that are not from the Libyan military stocks, and also some old WWII and earlier bolt-action military arms that probably did not come from Libyan military stocks, such as Mausers and Carcanos.

It takes more than just keeping and bearing arms. The most successful rebellions involved countries with a long history of having a militia tradition with at least a mediocre militia in existence all the way to an outstanding one, broad ownership of and proficiency in the use of arms, and a culture of marksmanship. They also involved centralized leadership and rather uniform political goals as well as the support of local or other levels of government. Most of these elements were lacking in Libya.

The good thing is that this is a conservative rebellion rather than a revolution, making it rather exceptional as far as these uprisings in the Muslim world go.

Bogart
03-23-2011, 7:31 PM
It should be pointed out that Gaddafi opened his armories to the public once the U.N. Strikes began. News agencies reported that a million citizens were being armed. Gaddafi said it was to arm the insurgency if U.N. forces came in on foot. So I don't think Gaddafi is afraid of people getting guns.

pyro3k2
03-23-2011, 7:37 PM
A lot more than 2A rights would have been needed to avoid this. There are only a handfull of countries in the area that haven't ended up as a religious dictatorship. Seperation of mosque and state would have been far more important than anything else, but 2A would not have hurt :)

southernsnowshoe
03-23-2011, 7:38 PM
When I watch the news events unfold about Libya and the rest of the area I wonder, would 2A gun rights have helped the whole region be more secure and free the last century, and would 2A rights in Libya in general have helped the masses overthrow ghadaffi.




Tanks, planes and helicopters don't hold ground, bodies, armed bodies hold ground.

jamesob
03-23-2011, 7:43 PM
they are armed with ak47s and rpg's i think they are just fine.

510dat
03-23-2011, 8:54 PM
This isn't a People vs. Government revolution, this is two different tribes fighting against each other. One tribe is based in Tripoli, and happens to be the one that Ghaddafi is part of, and the other one is based in Bengazi. The second group is the one fighting Ghaddafi, and the first group is the one Ghaddafi gave all the guns to.

The rebellion has been able to field tanks, artillery and anti-aircraft weapons at one time or another, but they aren't as well equipped as the government, and they aren't nearly as well organized, which is the real key.

bandook
03-23-2011, 10:26 PM
The rebels' issue isn't a lack of guns. Its a lack or organization and command structure.

guntrust
03-24-2011, 5:58 AM
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is WHOLLY INADEQUATE to the government of any other…”--John Adams

rolo
03-24-2011, 6:28 AM
This isn't a People vs. Government revolution, this is two different tribes fighting against each other.

This is the key problem that wasn't addressed when Africa and the Middle East were decolonized. Artificial state boundaries split nearly every single tribal area in both regions and were stringently enforced by border patrols and despots in the new states who were handed over to the "most favored" tribes to the detriment of the remainder.

These people's revolutions are the ultimate expression of the desire to restore the old tribal order in both regions. They DO NOT want to intermingle except perhaps in trade.

Entire peoples are being wiped out because they can no longer ply the one thing that bound them together as a culture, free trade. They've lost their sovereignty thanks to our need to put arbitrary lines on a map. No easy bloodless fix I'm afraid.

QQQ
03-24-2011, 6:34 AM
To those who say they're using mainly AK's:

There are also a lot of FAL's. And firearms are legally-owned. As a matter of fact, Ghaddafi has indicated that he intends to distribute arms to his civilians for free if we try to invade.

bubbapug1
03-24-2011, 9:49 AM
I researched their gun laws, they are highly restrictive. To say they (the libyians) have a right to own guns is like saying we have the right to ccw in LA county, on paper it looks good, but the reality is not the same.

yelohamr
03-24-2011, 10:46 AM
The rebels should be glad they don't have CA gun rights.

bubbapug1
03-24-2011, 8:54 PM
I think we have more rights than libyians do. We can buy almost anything we want in California except fully auto guns and hi cap mags. A bullet button can be shed and mags unblocked if need be. Fully auto guns are tough to hit things with, and the 50 bmg ban is the only true limit on firepower which matters.

I don't like the laws, don't get me wrong, but I understand why some misdirected and underhanded politicians were able to sell them to the public after the mass killings years ago. Almost all mass murderers are apprehended during a mag change, and it makes some sense to limit the mag size. However, criminals and mass murderers don't exactly worry about gun and hi cap mag laws do they?? Its like locking a screen door at night...really? will that stop a rapist hell bent on mayham?

I do think with the increase in state firepower and technology we should be allowed to own RPG's, cruise missles, and heavy artillary pieces to balance the threat a dictator could amass should she decide to.

The founding fathers wrote the 2a to protect the citizens from the government, and anyone who wants to do away with it and also seeking pwer for themselves should be looked upon with a jaundiced eye.

yelohamr
03-24-2011, 9:21 PM
Libya and CA have something in common. Neither have the 2ND Amendment in their constitutions.

pitchbaby
03-24-2011, 9:25 PM
If gun ownership were as prolific as it is here, sure... they would have faired better... the rebels were POORLY armed... don't let a few shots of them on the news with an occasional AK fool you.

Trojan Bayonet
03-24-2011, 10:58 PM
Note that Qadhafi's forces have not advanced on Benghazi, despite their numerical advantage in armor and artillery. Advancing on Benghazi would be a nightmare for Qadhafi's forces because there would be an armed rebel behind every corner and peering out of every window.

CCWFacts
03-24-2011, 11:01 PM
Mere ownership of guns wouldn't have made any difference.

What they need is not just ownership, but mindset and training. That's what really hurt them. They were able to acquire guns but it's much easier to acquire a gun and pull a trigger than it is to acquire the training necessary to be effective. That's what they lacked and they have paid, and will continue to pay, dearly for that.

We need not just guns but training in tactical use. I'm a beginner myself, but I know to aim my shots and manage ammo. Two very simple ideas which the Lybian rebels didn't have, and they paid a big price.

It's not just having a gun, it's being able to use it effectively.

bubbapug1
03-25-2011, 7:21 PM
I'm a beginner myself, but I know to aim my shots and manage ammo. Two very simple ideas which the Lybian rebels didn't have, and they paid a big price.

It's not just having a gun, it's being able to use it effectively.

I guess thats it, they blew all their ammo....the tanks, artillary, jets, and snipers all kind of didn't matter. I just didn't know, Thanks for that wonderful insight.

skylovia
03-25-2011, 8:27 PM
This thread has got me thinking that this sort of thing happening in the US is kind of far fetched. Guns EVERYWHERE. Military grade optics available to the public. And a "Dont eff with me attitude" bred into at LEAST ten percent of us. Not to mention 50bmgs, Kentucky machine gun shoots, molle web equipment, 300 dollar range estimating scopes, 200 dollar soft body armor, ect. ;) God bless this country. Were in a rough patch right now, but I think we'll make it.

CCWFacts
03-26-2011, 8:57 AM
I guess thats it, they blew all their ammo....the tanks, artillary, jets, and snipers all kind of didn't matter. I just didn't know, Thanks for that wonderful insight.

I'm just giving that as an example. See this LA Times article (http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/08/world/la-fg-libya-rebels-20110308/3) for more details. Yes, lack of training cost them, a lot. Merely having a gun in the closet is worth nothing. Training but no gun is better than gun but no training, because it's quicker to acquire a gun than it is to acquire training.

In Libya, mistakes are costing untrained rebels

The anti-Moammar Kadafi fighters celebrated when they should have been taking crucial battlefield steps. Forced to retreat, they continue to waste ammunition by firing at nothing.
March 08, 2011|By David Zucchino, Los Angeles Times

Arhoma Shahin, 46, a 23-year army veteran, was wearily showing a young rebel how to use an antiaircraft gun Monday. But he didn't let the man fire it, or even turn the crank to aim it.

"This is a revolution -- we're all new at this," Shahin shrugged.

The rebels use the old antiaircraft guns in unorthodox ways. They often aim "direct fire" at people rather than skyward at aircraft, as the guns were designed to be used. Regardless of what they aim at, they usually miss.

Now, I have never used an AA gun. However, I know that my skills and understanding with regular rifles and shotguns would apply directly. Ideas of ammo management, trigger control, sight picture, aimed fire all transfer from my AR-15 experience to an AA which I've never used before. From shotgun shooting, the idea of leading the target applies. And I'm generally comfortable and confident in the idea of shooting things. I'm sure I would be clumsy at first with an AA gun but at least I would have a basis and would be able to self-correct as I get experience with it.

In contrast the Libyan rebels are touching a gun for the first time moments before they go into battle. That's costing them.

bigstick61
03-26-2011, 11:40 AM
Note that Qadhafi's forces have not advanced on Benghazi, despite their numerical advantage in armor and artillery. Advancing on Benghazi would be a nightmare for Qadhafi's forces because there would be an armed rebel behind every corner and peering out of every window.

That's not why. Qaddafi was able to take multiple cities under those circumstances. Now if he tries to attack he will come under heavy air attack, as he has been every time he has tried to advance.