I think its a combination of both. The fact that our technology would not be as advanced, plus the people themselves would leave America at a loss against the government.
And what is wrong with moving on when debating? Debates hardly ever stay on topic. They usually expand to other areas of debating, which usually opens up the debate for a more indepth discussion. That is how people learn. Maybe you're too stupid to realize that. 
As you see, the more we debated, the more we expanded on our discussion. Now we need to take other factors into consideration, such as how a population would actually learn to defend themselves, even with guns, given their lack of training and their propensity to spend all days indoors on their computers. You can hardly ever only take in ONE variable when debating.
I agree as evidenced by your original idiocy in this thread.
you do realize that its these same ppl that make up the military right? The military is pulling stright from the pool of ppl it would be fighting. So to think the military somehow has an upper hand in terms of personnel is ignorant.
You do realize that we have millions of ex military ppl in the public right now? you think they will be spared? you think they will side with the govt?
how do you think the viet cong learned? terrorists?
if you had taken in more than one variable when forming your original thesis you wouldnt have come across as the idiotic moron you have. If you would sit back, look at history and take an objective view of the situation you would realise youre being just as idiotic now.
Either way Im down...Im gonna go drink some booze, eat some good food, watch some good football(hopefully) and be happy knowing that history has already and will again eventually prove youre a bigger idiot than someone who spends their time trying to get others to "melt" on the interweb.
Cheers!!!
