Details are still scant, but…
“I mean, he had a lot of ammunition in that house, and certainly … all of us were strapped, you know, with ammunition, and we were calling for additional ammunition,” Kraus said. “Like I said, we tried to give him every opportunity to come out.”
…I’ll go way out on a limb and suggest that this could’ve been handled better.
The dude was able to hold off 75 police for 6 hours.
Seems like having that gun was working exactly as intended and advertised. You’d only need tens of people to waste millions in costs and take over an entire city. Can you imagine the cluster fuck with 15 of these going on, traking hostages? You could shut down an entire city with just a bit of coordination.
The insane number of cops here is due to the offices wanting to get in on shooting at someone, not any meaningful need to have 75 officers respond.
Anyone who shot their firearm gets paid leave. Hell I’d rush over there, fire my weapon at the houses wall, then duck for the rest of the time.
What would be a reasonable number?
Are you expecting them to go 1v1 like it’s a fucking video game?
Less than 75.
My point is overwhelming the police takes more than a few simultaneous shootouts.
👌👍
75 police for 6 hours and still lost. Wasted all his money, all his ammo, threw away his life and for what?
We don’t live in an anarchist state. There are rules and norms we need to follow if we’re going to live in a peaceful society and your takeover fantasy is dangerous and unrealistic.
Skill issue. I’d have gone 30-0 to get the tac nuke.
Able to hold off the cops for 6 hours, but worse than that, everyone in the country saw someone hold off the cops for 6 hours. And this is after everyone watched the cops stand around afraid to save children from a shooter. Maybe the pigs should work on some training, so they aren’t scared, or unable to get one person out of a house.
He’s dead now. He injured 0 police.
Try that and see how it goes. See if the military doesn’t get involved quickly.
Can you show me where the military was involved?
They didn’t need to be because a dude with a gun is not nearly that big a deal.
That’s how silly it is that people buy guns to try to overthrow the government
Ok but imagine 1000 dudes like this
Even the military would find that difficult to deal with
No they would not lol. They’d just bomb the house.
Once the military is involved, ordinance and utter air superiority is also involved.
“Dudes with guns” have a 0% chance of defeating the US military. People bring up vietnam and Afghanistan as if A) those wars weren’t heavy on RoE and more about military policing than war - which a revolution most assuredly would not be and B) the kill ratio of those conflicts is in US favor by shit like 30+ to 1. That’s in enemy territory, thousands of miles from home, with stretched logistics lines, and a hostile or at best indifferent local populace outside of every major city.
The US lost fewer than 2,000 soldiers to enemy actions in Afghanistan. That’s fewer people than died in 9/11, spread out over 2 decades. That’s more than 1/3rd fewer people than the US lost in just the battle of Iwo Jima.
Once you consider that these “armed revolutionaries” will be viewed as terrorists by at minimum 160 million of their neighbors, and they will be denied all critical infrastructure, funding, and support, it is a no-brainer that they will be slaughtered. That’s even assuming these irregulars count as soldiers and wouldn’t just piss and shit themselves once they started getting bombed from beyond visual range. War is really fucking scary and the average angry shut-in cannot handle it.
The math just doesn’t hold up. This isn’t a real option - it’s a dangerous, radicalizing fantasy that encourages lone wolves and militias to attack soft targets.