Off With a Bang: Assault on Second Amendment Begins

FrontPage Magazine ^ | January 8, 2013 | Matthew Vadum

[OneWingedShark]

>>“Therein lies a risk to us and maybe a goal for the bamster: the only way to enlist the support of the armed forces would be against a seceeding state, they could and would never be engaged in a fight against US citizens, but against a separatist state? Well, as you Well, as you say, Lincoln was the model for that. Just a thought.”
>
>You’re full of crap. Our armed forces are not Nazis, nor gestapo, nor eizengruppen. Got it?
>Don’t ever infer that our Marines and soldiers are Nazis.

He didn't infer that the troops were NAZI, but correctly stated there is American precedent: the Civil War. Further, given some discussions I've had with members of armed forces -- in addition to my own experience -- there really is a tendency to "just follow[ing] orders."

The trial of LTC Lakin also illustrates a glaring gap in military jurisprudence: for the very authority which ordered him to Afghanistan (what his charges stemmed from) must needs be delegated via the Chain-of-Command from the President, and the President gains his authority as Commander-in-Chief from the Constitution. One cannot [legitimately] accept the authority given by the Constitution while simultaneously rejecting the requirements of that Constitution.

The above, therefore, makes me concerned that any soldier rejecting orders to fire upon American Citizens will not be given a just trial, but instead be regarded as one who disobeys orders -- regardless of the legitimacy of those orders.

Now, this is not to say that there won't be some/many who reject such orders; but rather that the military will become fractured should a succession-style (or martial-law) event happen.

[OneWingedShark]

I think we are being scammed....something else is going on they don’t want us to know about while this “gun” issue is being plastered everywhere. Heck, Canada could NOT even get it’s citizens to Register their guns. They finally gave up after about 10 years of trying. I truly believe something else is going on that we should have our eyes on.

What do you think it is? -- Debt-stuff? Obamacare stuff? -- I've also heard that the CO theater shooting (and Sandy Hook) both have discontinuities; could they be ginning up gun-ban stuff to take focus away from the events which [seem to have] sparked the ban-talks? Perhaps that they were, if not government staged, then 'government sponsored' events, blending false-flag & psy-ops?

[goodnesswins]

Where does your SIL live? (Besides lib la la land)

[tpmintx]

Hmmm. The last time I read about the guns in TX, it was estimated there were 2+ for every man woman and child in the state in private ownership.

Do you remember Waco? At the time, I commented to a few friends that the Davidian's had about the same number of guns as any random collection an equivalent population of Texans.

Personally, I think that very few LEO's in Texas would be willing to enforce such an order.

Is it "armed insurrection" if the state government is on your side?

[ponygirl]

She’s from Buffalo

[Texas Fossil]

Yes, I remember Waco. (was living in OK at the time) There was never a satisfactory review of those actions. Nuts.

Personally, I think that very few LEO's in Texas would be willing to enforce such an order.

I agree.

Is it "armed insurrection" if the state government is on your side?

Short answer is no. If there is a "rebellion" in TX it will come at the state level. Texas is still largely run by the adults. DC is not. If the Idiot-in-Chief goes the Executive Order route as rumored, we are appoaching the buckle of Pandora's Box. He is not popular in TX, he knows it full well. We shall see if he is trying to incite an open rebellion. At some point the issue of the Constitution will be the pivot point.

[sergeantdave]

“Further, given some discussions I’ve had with members of armed forces — in addition to my own experience — there really is a tendency to “just follow[ing] orders.”

Really?!!? That’s disturbing. My experience is the opposite. Maybe I hang out with a better quality of Americans than you. How about you name this “tendency to follow orders” group so we can send in proselytizers to correct the Nuremberg “following orders” compunction.

There’s a small gang of commie infiltrators and doom and gloom surrender monkeys here on FR trying to demoralize conservatives. When you post stuff like this, you better have some facts to back up your opinion.

Comparing the 1861 Civil War to today is absurd. There’s real life and modern day examples of what happens to dictators who order their army to shot their families in their beds. Kaddhafi tried that and ended up dead on the hood of a BMW SUV, shot dead with his own gold-plated 9mm. His elitist army officers and UN bureaucrats decorated lampposts across the country.

[jeffc]

"The 2nd amendment does NOT give us the "right' to bear arms."

Which document are you reading from?

Essentially correct. The Constitution only enshrines some of our rights. It is a dangerous and slippery path to believe that our rights come from a piece of paper. It is what liberals want us all to believe. Don't fall for it.

[musicman]

Help FR Continue the Conservative Fight!
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help Keep FR In the Battle!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!

[OneWingedShark]

“Further, given some discussions I’ve had with members of armed forces — in addition to my own experience — there really is a tendency to “just follow[ing] orders.”
Really?!!? That’s disturbing. My experience is the opposite. Maybe I hang out with a better quality of Americans than you. How about you name this “tendency to follow orders” group so we can send in proselytizers to correct the Nuremberg “following orders” compunction.

Maybe, it certainly wasn't as widespread as you might think; however I encountered it in training environs from the teachers -- which means that it was definitely inserted into the minds of troops; and usually it came in the form of the "[when] you signed up, you signed up to defend the Constitution, not enjoy it[s protections]."

There’s a small gang of commie infiltrators and doom and gloom surrender monkeys here on FR trying to demoralize conservatives. When you post stuff like this, you better have some facts to back up your opinion.

See the above.

Comparing the 1861 Civil War to today is absurd.

Not entirely; there are some parallels -- notably concerning the Rights & Powers of the several States. (Some people would say that governments only have powers, this is generally true, however in a federal system where the states delegate powers there are rights: just like in any legal contractual agreement.)

There’s real life and modern day examples of what happens to dictators who order their army to shot their families in their beds. Kaddhafi tried that and ended up dead on the hood of a BMW SUV, shot dead with his own gold-plated 9mm. His elitist army officers and UN bureaucrats decorated lampposts across the country.

That's true; and one thing the elite are not really considering as they continue provoking the average Joe. That, and the fact that they see killing off at least a tenth of the population of the country as 'necessary' for their plans is not something that instills a confidence in getting a peaceful solution.