This photo was taken by Wes last weekend during a range day with the Randolf Rifleman’s Union, his local pro-2A organization. The rifle is a Mossberg MVP Varmint, it features a laminated bench-style stock, fluted bull barrel and best of all, AR-15 magazine compatibility.

The quote “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.” is often attributed to Admiral Yamamoto of the Japanese Navy during WWII. This photo reminded Wes of the quote. He wrote to us …

While I cannot speak for every blade of grass, I would dare say that the quote is probably accurate when it comes to Randolph County, North Carolina. Considering we were ranked 9th in the nation for gun ownership on a countywide basis.

That quote has been debated among gun nuts for decades. Some argue that no quantity of civilian firearms could hold back a modern army. The question may be a moot point since the end of the Cold War, but if events this year in the Middle East and Eastern Europe are anything to go by, a determined local populace armed with small arms can cause considerable problems to conventional armies.


  • Rah rah aside I don’t think Japan was logistically capable of sustaining an invasion of the mainland U.S. They could barely handle the Aleutian Islands.

    • H92

      there had been fuel rationing in japan since 1940.The rational ones thought they could fight for 2 years max before they ran low on material.

    • I doubt it as well. I also doubt the Soviet Union could have during the Cold War, but its academic anyway.

    • Copyright101

      Agreed. Japanese strategy was never to defeat/invade the US. It was to weaken the US long enough to establish island bases on it’s side of the Pacific and consolidate it’s conquests on mainland Asia. Thus making a US counter-offensive too difficult.

      A high risk strategy that was only contemplated in 1941, I suspect, because the Dutch & French had been defeated by Germany and the British Empire was fully committed. For Japan to have taken on the the USN and RN at the same time would have been way too hard.

  • handfulofsounds

    He never said that. If we want the other side to stop posting bogus facts, we should do the same. Stop using this quote since it does nothing to help our argument for gun rights.

    • Steve Truffer

      Dunno if it was amended, but the article says “Attributed” to Yamamoto. Had they said that it was, in fact, spoken by him, I would agree.

      • RiflemansUnion


    • RiflemansUnion

      The key word was “attributed” to. Both the article and the individual who took the photo state this. We have no idea if King Leonidas actually said “Molon Labe” but it has become a rally cry nonetheless. Maybe folks should stop nit picking, and just enjoy a photo for Cripes Sake.

      • Yes, I said attributed to. I did not say he said it. As far as I can tell, nobody knows where it comes from, but for a VERY long time it has been attributed to him.

        There is also no proof he did not say it. Just that there does not seem to be evidence that he did.

        • gunslinger

          i thought i read somewhere that it was debunked that he said it.

          at the end of the day, it’s an interesting quote. especially with the “most heavily armed counties in the US” post yesterday

    • valorius


  • Vitor

    LOL @ the point becoming moot. Armed citizens are more important than ever once the oligarchy of Washington DC crosses the line really badly, people will need their guns.

    • H92

      But see how well an arsenal composed mainly of light weapons worked out for the Free Syrian Army?

    • I did not say armed weapons were not important. Please don’t twist my words.

      I implied no foreign power at this time is able to invade the USA. It simply cannot happen right now, and has not since the Soviet Union broke up. Only a few countries have close to the capability of a single Carrier Strike Group, let alone 11 of them.

      • valorius

        Depends how foreign…. There might be an interstellar invasion fleet enroute right now. 😉

      • Nicholas I

        Aliens have already taken control of American legislatures, the white house, the media, the courts, the schools…

  • meatball

    Baloney…..he didn’t say that because it is nonsense…..a trained military unit is superior in every way except maybe numbers…..a gun does not a warrior make…..and, a warrior with a gun does not a soldier make…..soldiers know how to work TOGETHER……the rest do not….

    • You have not seen some of the military personal that I have seen in less developed corners of the globe. A trained unit is only as good as its training (and moral and leadership).

      • iksnilol

        Guerilla tactics are the thing. Just look at Afghanistan, Vietnam, Iraq and a bunch of other countries.

    • Grindstone50k

      And yet some how a rabble of farmers and such defeated the strongest, most professional army in the world only a few centuries ago…

      • gunslinger

        i’m not a revolutionary war buff, but how much different were the arms of the Brits vs. that of the US? i would venture the brits had slightly better weapons (cannons and maybel calvery?) but all in all, they were pretty much on par.

        today’s military have helicopoters and planes, with smart bombs and the like. i think the tech gap between the civliians vs. the military is a bit larger than at the time of the revolutionary war.

        • Grindstone50k

          Yeah, not like a rabble of farmers and guerrillas could fight off the world’s most powerful army. Certainly not in places like Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan…

    • valorius

      As an ex us army infantryman, please allow me to pose a one word retort:


    • whskee

      You do know that one of our core SOF skills is to teach and train foreign fighters right? Many who have been extremely effective, and operate with next to nothing for support? Even without SOF training them, people with a will and a means can wreak hell on a supposedly modern force.

  • ghost

    Paranoid I ain’t, anoid I are.

  • Mk32

    This reminds of this video:
    One of my favorites first seen from this blog in fact.

  • BangZoom!

    “a determined local populace armed with small arms can cause considerable problems to conventional armies”

    The difference is conventional armies (US and UK et al) fight using Marquess of Queensbury rules against these “insurgents” while the latter are under no constraints whatsoever. I dare say an outside invader would observe no such niceties as gentlemanly rules of engagement nor sadly would our own governments using force against their own citizens.

  • Nicholas I

    Americans don’t have to worry about any foreign army invading.