What's new
By:

will military fire on u.s. citezens ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sir Gala Clad said:
I would say that it is far more likely now than before 911.

In the past the national guard, the state militia, was called in to deal will civil insurrections, disasters, protests, uprisings, rather than the military (Federal).

From what I have seen and experienced, we are in grave danger of becoming a police state , assuming that we have not already become one.

This is what terrorists want, as their goal is to create such an oppressive police state that it is overthrown by its citizens.
Click to expand...

Naw... time will tell.
 

Treasure_Hunter said:
.

If he has soldiers fire on civilians because they are defending the 2nd amend he will have crossed a line of no return and you can bet it will be the start of a civil war. Soldiers are not required to follow unlawful orders. I have talked to a coupl soldiers I met and asked them, i cant quote them due to language except to say it was no way would they fire, the adjectives used were stronger.

He is using gun control to draw attention away from the poor economy, high unemployment and the other issues.

Good news is now there is someone below jimmy carter on list....
Click to expand...

DISINFORMED; DISINFORMATION... YOU questioned ACTIVE DUTY Soldiers... OR VETS;
I don't know about the LAWFUL/UNLAWFUL Thing. ONLY VETS, ACTIVE DUTY Military folks can ascertain that...
 

Last edited:
Let's think about this. We have the National Guard which is under the Governor's control, the various reserve units of Army, Navy, Marines & Air force which are under federal control. Now we have the Civil Authorities. The Sheriff of each county is an independent elected official. He actually has the most legal enforcement in the state . The state police are under the Governor's control. The city and county police are under local jurisdiction control. We also have various park and game police. Woops I almost forgot the FBI, CIA, ATFE, T men, border patroll, Customs agents, Secret Service, NSA, NOW do you think this is a police state? Do you think they would fire on us to collect our guns? Frank

111-1 profile.webp
 

Frankn said:
Let's think about this. We have the National Guard which is under the Governor's control, the various reserve units of Army, Navy, Marines & Air force which are under federal control. Now we have the Civil Authorities. The Sheriff of each county is an independent elected official. He actually has the most legal enforcement in the state . The state police are under the Governor's control. The city and county police are under local jurisdiction control. We also have various park and game police. Woops I almost forgot the FBI, CIA, ATFE, T men, border patroll, Customs agents, Secret Service, NSA, NOW do you think this is a police state? Do you think they would fire on us to collect our guns? Frank

View attachment 730194
Click to expand...

WTSHTF? When...?
 

If not mentioned before, remember Kent State.
 

if they will fire on US citizens or not.” Those who will not are being removed.
Click to expand...

No respect from me for the "little o", but ....

question, are we sure ?

I know if I were Prez, or a military leader, I'd consider the question.
But would remove or at least keep restraints on those who I believe would fire.
 

Last edited:
I think we all know that no matter what, if things get bad enough then the military will fire at anyone.
 

LinkHylian said:
I think we all know that no matter what, if things get bad enough then the military will fire at anyone.
Click to expand...

I do believe many would. as much as I'd like to believe different.
it is obvious there are many who did not join to protect our country.
all it takes to prove this is find 1 Veteran who believes in Gun control.

I'm sure there are allot less since the end of the draft,
but there have to be some who joined because of pier pressure
among other reasons.

add to that, the fact there is a secret service proves
there are those who will take orders and Kill or die for someone who
is willing to go against the constitution.
 

Last edited:
Rebel - KGC said:
Was he "active duty"...? Gotta follow orders of CO...
Click to expand...

Rebel that defense want work, after WWII they hung soldiers for that same excuse "I was only following orders"...


They are required to follow LAWFUL orders. An order which is unlawful not only does not need to be obeyed, but obeying such an order can result in criminal prosecution of the one who obeys it. Military courts have long held that military members are accountable for their actions even while following orders -- if the order was illegal.


When you join the military you swear an oath to defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic, it comes before swearing to follow orders.....

Oath of officers

"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)


Oath of enlisted

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

​
 

Treasure_Hunter said:
Rebel that defense want work, after WWII they hung soldiers for that same excuse "I was only following orders"...


They are required to follow LAWFUL orders. An order which is unlawful not only does not need to be obeyed, but obeying such an order can result in criminal prosecution of the one who obeys it. Military courts have long held that military members are accountable for their actions even while following orders -- if the order was illegal.


When you join the military you swear an oath to defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic, it comes before swearing to follow orders.....

Oath of officers

"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)


Oath of enlisted

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

​
Click to expand...

TY...
 

Casca said:
If not mentioned before, remember Kent State.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I remember that... 1970. Dropped out of college; went to work in muffler-making factory (Walker's Manufacturing). Went back to college in 1973...
 

Last edited:
jeff of pa said:
I do believe many would. as much as I'd like to believe different.
it is obvious there are many who did not join to protect our country.
all it takes to prove this is find 1 Veteran who believes in Gun control.

I'm sure there are allot less since the end of the draft,
but there have to be some who joined because of pier pressure
among other reasons.

add to that, the fact there is a secret service proves
there are those who will take orders and Kill or die for someone who
is willing to go against the constitution.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt there are some that would fire, that is where the civil war part will start as many of those that want fire on civilians would defend the citizens against those that will.... History has shown that..... Current administration is not real popular with the military, the military will follow all orders they feel are legal with out question, it is when the time comes that many feel the orders are not legal where the war will most likely start....This is what the administration has to understand, there is a line they do not want to cross, firing on civilians defending their constitutional rights is a line, civilians will not fire the first shot....

Politicians want to be reelected, supporting an administration firing on your constituents will never get you reelected................


The British considered colonial muskets as assault weapons, they decided to confiscate them and that started a revolution..........
 

Last edited:
Treasure_Hunter said:
I have no doubt there are some that would fire, that is where the civil war part will start as many of those that want fire on civilians would defend the citizens against those that will.... History has shown that..... Current administration is not real popular with the military, the military will follow all orders they feel are legal with out question, it is when the time comes that many feel the orders are not legal where the war will most likely start....This is what the administration has to understand, there is a line they do not want to cross, firing on civilians defending their constitutional rights is a line, civilians will not fire the first shot....

Politicians want to be reelected, supporting an administration firing on your constituents will never get you reelected................


The British considered colonial muskets as assault weapons, they decided to confiscate them and that started a revolution..........
Click to expand...

Back to what I said earlier in this thread... What are we even discussing here? Seriously, think about it for a minute.

You are suggesting that the President would actually order the miltary to fire upon American citizens. Why? What evidence is there to even support such a concept.

I am saying it is a rediculous argument to even speculate over. You guys are making something out of nothing and all this serves to do is spread hate and fear and get impressionable people "wound up". Think about it...
 

jerseyben said:
Back to what I said earlier in this thread... What are we even discussing here? Seriously, think about it for a minute.

You are suggesting that the President would actually order the miltary to fire upon American citizens. Why? What evidence is there to even support such a concept.

I am saying it is a rediculous argument to even speculate over. You guys are making something out of nothing and all this serves to do is spread hate and fear and get impressionable people "wound up". Think about it...
Click to expand...

AGREE! PROBABLY spilling their coffee, too...
 

jerseyben said:
Back to what I said earlier in this thread... What are we even discussing here? Seriously, think about it for a minute.

You are suggesting that the President would actually order the miltary to fire upon American citizens. Why? What evidence is there to even support such a concept.

I am saying it is a rediculous argument to even speculate over. You guys are making something out of nothing and all this serves to do is spread hate and fear and get impressionable people "wound up". Think about it...
Click to expand...

Go back to sleep.
 

Jersey thread is about 2nd amendment, my post is directly related to that, military has given surveys and among the questions asked were would you fire on american citizens, those orders would come from the president.

If you don't want to discuss it that is certainly your right, don't discuss it, you can either just read posts or if you wish avoid the topics. Topic is with in our rules at the moment per admins, when they revoke it we will lock topic down.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hockey Stick Inflation

⬅️ Previous Thread

Care to elaborate on this?

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Similar threads

dognose
NORAD's Santa Tracker began with a typo and a good sport
Replies
1
Views
278
GirlWithWolf
GirlWithWolf
dognose
U.S. cannabis shoppers face a market flush with illegal weed
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
3K
Terry Soloman
Terry Soloman
dognose
Four Places To Find Fossilized Shark Teeth In The United States
Replies
14
Views
2K
Jatrox
J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest Discussions

Back
Top Bottom