Friday, February 22, 2013

From My Cold Dead Hand Part 2: Platooning

After reading yesterday's article, long-time reader pdwalker commented thus:

As for telling the sheriff "no", it's going to come down to one of three things:

1/ The sheriff says "I agree" and goes home.

2/ They won't give you the chance to say no, with a full out assault on your home, killing your dogs and generally shooting the place up in the middle of the night

3/ or if it is just the sheriff alone, they will come back in force.

Who is prepared to make a stand against that? Are you prepared to sacrifice your family for your principles? Most people have too much to lose to make that sacrifice.

Older, single men? Maybe. Men with families to support? Very few, if any.

And that's what the powers that be depend on. Things have to get a whole lot worse before people will be willing to take action. And by the time it does, it may be too late.

Which is, indeed, the threat we would face if Leviathan were to attempt the confiscation of all private arms. In the face of such overwhelming force, an individual resistor would stand little chance of escaping with his life, let alone his liberty or his firearms.

There is a countermeasure. Like most tactics, it's neither perfect nor costless. But it would substantially improve the citizenry's chances of prevailing against the State. However, it will require us to do something many Americans, especially in the high-density population zones along the coasts, have neglected to do and will find somewhat distasteful.


The keys to successfully resisting an assault whose exact timing cannot be known well in advance are:

  1. A continuous state of readiness;
  2. The ability to mobilize swiftly;
  3. The ability to inflict unacceptable punishment on the invader;
  4. The willingness to endure a few "false alarms;"
  5. An adequately broad defensive front.

Most of that should go without saying. Yet it must be said, because of the preparations it implies:

  1. There must be a way to detect the onset of the assault far enough ahead to mobilize;
  2. Mobilization must not incur excessive costs upon the persons involved;
  3. Everyone must come to the front line ready to shoot to kill;
  4. Erroneous mobilizations must not evoke the "boy who cried wolf" effect;
  5. The defense must be a community effort.

None of those conditions are easily met, but in my estimation, the hardest of them will be #5, because of the ongoing atomization of American society.


Do you know your neighbors?
Do you know their capabilities and state of readiness?
Are you and they sufficiently in agreement on the right to keep and bear arms? Would you trust them to "have your back" in the event of an assault by lawless "law enforcement?"
Would they trust you in equal measure?

If the answers to all five questions are satisfactory, you have a chance -- not a guarantee -- of assembling a community defense against such an assault: an ad hoc platoon that would mobilize to protect any one of its members who came under attack.

As I said at the outset, there would be costs. Some members would need to acquire additional firepower or training. A degree of vigilance would be required that many persons on a typical suburban block would resent and resist. The "boy who cried wolf" effect must not be neglected; such a platoon could lose commitment and cohesion by a sufficient number of false alarms -- and "a sufficient number" could be as low as one or two.

More, the enemy, broadly conceived, could not help but be aware of the formation of such platoons. It would marshal its non-violent forces to defame and degrade them. Those involved in such an undertaking would need to anticipate such slanders and be prepared to endure them.

I'm not talking about a militia here, at least not of the sort that's been caricatured in the media. I'm describing a small, geographically concentrated defensive force. Its participants know and trust one another personally, by virtue of proximity. They agree sufficiently about their rights as individuals, the threats looming over them, and the importance of defending them. And they're willing to spend a few bucks, and lose a few hours' sleep now and then, to ensure that they will be defended.


Now we get to the upside to forming such a platoon:

  • It countervails the ongoing tendency toward social atomization and the isolation of individuals from their neighbors;
  • It directly fosters several virtues, including the sense of responsibility to oneself and the comprehension of the need for mutual aid in times of crisis.
  • It puts the political enemies of our rights on notice that we cannot be talked out of them.
  • It puts concern, at the very least, into the myrmidons of the State that their efforts to disarm us might occasion the shedding of blood -- theirs.
  • Each such platoon that forms has an encouraging effect upon others.

Would such a platoon constitute a perfect defense? Of course not. The State might send overwhelming force against such a community. Indeed, though it seems absurd, the possibility of an armored assault, against which small arms of the sort private citizens normally possess would be impotent, cannot be discounted. But at that point there would be open war between the people and the State; factors well beyond the ones that pertain today would come into consideration.

But it's today with which we must be concerned...today.

Such an undertaking is not for the weak-willed or lily-livered. It requires effort and courage. Many Americans lack a sufficiency of both. But not all of us -- and for the rest, there's never been a better time to acquire them.

No man starts out as a paragon of dedication or courage. As Aristotle has told us, we acquire virtue by behaving virtuously: by doing the difficult, expensive, painful things we'd rather not do; by accepting short-term costs and pains for the long-term gains and satisfactions they promise. There's never been a better time, or a more important subject, over which to exert oneself.

Thoughts?

7 comments:

Ronald Barbour said...

It’s clear to anyone with the courage to see that the Obama Regime’s federal government is gunning up, gearing up and training up for civil war.

The only problem is that any plan for combat falls apart on first contact with an enemy force, as any military or veteran can tell you – look at balls up on the two year long planned assault on France in 1944 – D-Day – by the best and brightest Western military minds.

It is clear that D-Day was a close run thing and only the valor of the Allied troops and Hitler’s stupid decision to hold back the German tanks that saved the landings in Normandy.

Therefore, The Imperial Federal Redcoats may plan away, train away, plot away and dream all day that they are the most awesome lethal force on the planet; that We The People will simply lay down, play dead and allow our ability to defend the Republic stolen; but this patriot predicts when The Day finally comes for The Great Federal Gun Grab; the Feds will be in for a very rude awakening, just like the British military were on April 19, 1775.

Kirk said...

Fran, I would be very interested in hearing about your personal experience with the questions you've posed. Have you had this conversation with your neighbors? How did you broach the subject? In what forum? Did you need to prepare the ground with individual neighbors in advance? What you're advocating here is a powerful thing, but, to say the least, quite tricky to put in place in the current climate. If you misjudge one of your neighbors, and bring him into your confidence too soon, you could alert powers that want to thwart what you're attempting at a very early stage. And let's not fool ourselves, there are more indirect ways to thwart something like this than just direct assault. For instance, a trumped-up charge, completely unrelated to this activity, that results in the removal of the organizer from the situation would be a very effective countermeasure. So, I'm interested in hearing a discussion of tactics on this subject, beyond the broad strategy you've laid out here.

Anonymous said...

I am fairly new to this site and am enjoying it although I wish the subject matter were entirely different! Here are some brief thoughts:
1) These conversations with your neighbors which are awkward now may become less so once the other side steps up its campaign. 2) Don't begin a conversation with your neighbors with a "we should form an ad hoc platoon to stop Napolitano's brownshirts" but rather ease into it by talking preparedness then politics. Remember OPSEC. Isn't possible that your neighbor will "see something, say something", turn you in for suspicious activity and then you're done. 3) Assymetrical warfare does not passively wait for the enemy to approach the door. There will be men who will seek to disrupt the enemy through a variety of measures. These will be things not generally possible for the suburbanite to pull off. 4) Remember that men who fight for a paycheck are not as motivated as men who fight for a principle. We must make the man who knocks on the door wonder if this is the last time he will ever knock. (Remember Solzheintsyn's famous passage) And for those who worry about no-knock warrants at 3 AM, once the shooting starts there will be few who leave their doors vulnerable to such tactics. 5) Take heart! I believe it is early and all this may yet be avoided. Right now, DHS is just beginning to demonize us and desensitize their own troops to shooting citizens. I believe that many questions we are posing now will be answered "on the fly" as the time draws closer. 6) The powers that be understand that our side is gearing up and this will give them pause. Even blogs like this, are studied at Fusion Centers and are used as a measuring stick to grasp how widespread is our discontent. Peace!

Daniel K Day said...

pdwalker was right on point. As for the numbers 1, 2 and 3, how often does #1 ever happen? It'll most likely be #3, or #2 for people who write aggressive comments in blogs.

My thought? The moment the deputy rings your doorbell, for you, the United States of America is over, one way or the other.

Mark Butterworth said...

The very fact that so many of us are even talking and suggesting violent insurrection illustrates the prophecy contained in my post (scroll down) 2020 - The Great Reckoning.

Ten years ago, few of us would have contemplated serious rebellion. Now, as Francis pointed out before, we are clearly arming for war.

Something like 63 million guns have been purchased since Obama's election and there has been no slackening of demand.

Here's what I propose for when the sheriff comes to your door. If I am one of the first doors he comes to he'll get my weapon or weapons (I hope I'll have cached others), and I hope I video the encounter and get on the internet and scream bloody murder because as someone else pointed out, once the police start confiscating, the nation is over and the war has begun and men will then in great earnest, band together as Francis envisions.

Once men begin to form groups and small militias, it's all over for the police. Think what one man did to the LAPD recently. Imagine what a few hundred could do.

But the army and tanks come rolling in, you say? Rolling in where? Stationed how? To raid homes and confiscate weapons, men have to get out of APCs leaving them vulnerable to snipers.

And then there's the question of whether soldiers and officers will allow themselves to follow such orders, especially when so many former soldiers will be standing against them.

Daniel K Day said...

One more thought, with the blogmaster's permission. I gave the pacifistic response serious thought. There is a certain attraction to Gandhi's approach -- civil disobedience, accepting whatever punishment the authorities deal out as the sacrifice one is called to do. History has treated Gandhi and his followers kindly for that, overlooking his faults and mistakes. The pacifistic response can build a crushing moral authority, which sways a people, including a government, whose members are free to engage in moral debate.

OK -- so let me get this straight: We tell each other that self-defense is a civil right, including the right to defend oneself against a tyrannical government. We buy legal guns, learn to shoot them safely and maintain them, et cetra et cetera et cetera. And when the government tells us "Time to give them up!" we just hand them over?

Well, fuck that, right out loud.

First, what were we so loudly and "firmly" clinging to the principles of self-defense for, if we just hand over whatever weapons we are told to hand over?
Second, do we trust the integrity of our fellow citizens and the members of the bureaucracy to engage in an open, honest moral debate? I do not.

pdwalker said...

I've been thinking about this (no, I didn't strain myself but given the quality of my depth of thought that's not all that surprising).

Your idea can work and it is a good one.

I have some further thoughts:

- People will need to live in areas of smaller populations where families have roots and a real sense of community. Cities are too large and people are to out of touch with each other to make this easy.

- If you are new to a community, it could take a lot of time to "get established" and be considered a part of the community. Who's going to willingly trust a strange outsider? That kind of relationship building could take years. You might want to start now.

- People don't want to come across as wild eyed, paranoid crazies. Telling people that the government is out to get them, even it it is provably true, is a very large and bitter pill to swallow, perhaps too large. The approach will have to be slow and subtle.

- It should be a conservative community, one which has local officials actually supporting their people rather than being one that lords over their community and in support of gun rights.

- It should be a religious Christian community, one with a strong sense of morals and well attended churches. If you're an Atheist, shut-up and keep it to your self.

- has an active local militia? (I use that as an indication of a community that actually takes self defense seriously)

So are you prepared to move to such a community?

Maybe the Free State Project holds the key to finding the right community?

(The citadel also seems like a worthy project, although I'd be concerned about subversion from within and it becoming some kind of cult controlled too strongly by a few individuals from within. I'm waiting to see if they can pull it off. It may serve as a model for other communities to do something similar)

Maybe there is hope out there somewhere to find a free place to live or retire to.