VA National Guard OC in Staunton VA parks

HPmatt · Apr 21, 2015

Guess they want to show the over-the-mountain folks they mean business?

http://www.infowars.com/video-armed...s-conduct-exercise-near-childrens-playground/

skidmark · Apr 21, 2015

Dear sweet bunny slippers! The British are coming! THe British are coming!*

Troops carrying guns outside of a miliitary base = FEMA roundups. (Well, that really is what they are training for, but they aren't actually doing it yet.)

And "traffic control drills"? Really? Those are crossing guards (OK, the .mil calls them "road guards") who are supposed to see that cars do not come barreling through the intersection while the children are crossing the street.

* - Here's a clue, Sherlock. Back then everybody was British. There was no "us" to be versus "them" until we had won the war.

But more importantly, where are the Minutemen today? Armed (they are carrying guns but I'll bet there is not a working cartridge in the whole outfit) troops are marching through our parks and neighborhoods. Where are the folks there to tell them they had better not try any funny business?

And not the first 9-1-1 call? Used to be you could not OC in Gypsy Hill Park and get 100 yards without someone panicing.

stay safe.

peter nap · Apr 21, 2015

skidmark said:
Dear sweet bunny slippers! The British are coming! THe British are coming!*

Troops carrying guns outside of a miliitary base = FEMA roundups. (Well, that really is what they are training for, but they aren't actually doing it yet.)

And "traffic control drills"? Really? Those are crossing guards (OK, the .mil calls them "road guards") who are supposed to see that cars do not come barreling through the intersection while the children are crossing the street.

* - Here's a clue, Sherlock. Back then everybody was British. There was no "us" to be versus "them" until we had won the war.

But more importantly, where are the Minutemen today? Armed (they are carrying guns but I'll bet there is not a working cartridge in the whole outfit) troops are marching through our parks and neighborhoods. Where are the folks there to tell them they had better not try any funny business?

And not the first 9-1-1 call? Used to be you could not OC in Gypsy Hill Park and get 100 yards without someone panicing.

stay safe.

If I can carry a gun in the park the square heads should be able to too. It's only sporting.

Brian D. · Apr 21, 2015

Activities like this are of course worthy of keeping a watchful eye on, but for now I would leave the tinfoil in the cupboard, no need to craft ourselves helmets just yet.

My dad was Ohio National Guard circa 1950, right before he joined the Army a year or two later. While in the Guard he was part of a training exercise in which they "captured" downtown Loveland, Ohio. Back then it was probably hamlet/village sized, not a city like now. Dad told me they carried genuine rifles and sidearms, but no live ammunition. Think he mentioned they employed some smoke grenades, that's about as close to weapon-wielding as they got.

My pont being this sort of training is far from new.

solus · Apr 21, 2015

Nightmare said:
Yes, I am sure that such training predates 4 May 1970, the impending anniversary of the Kent State University - Ohio National Guard shootings.

http://www2.kent.edu/about/history/May4/

moral of that story is don't trap, real or perceived, and throw chunks of concrete at ARM'd guardsmen to make your Cambodia protest point!!

quote: The most important question associated with the events of May 4 is why did members of the Guard fire into a crowd of unarmed students? Two quite different answers have been advanced to this question: (1) the Guardsmen fired in self-defense, and the shootings were therefore justified and (2) the Guardsmen were not in immediate danger, and therefore the shootings were unjustified.

The answer offered by the Guardsmen is that they fired because they were in fear of their lives. Guardsmen testified before numerous investigating commissions as well as in federal court that they felt the demonstrators were advancing on them in such a way as to pose a serious and immediate threat to the safety of the Guardsmen, and they therefore had to fire in self-defense. Some authors (e.g., Michener, 1971 and Grant and Hill, 1974) agree with this assessment. Much more importantly, federal criminal and civil trials have accepted the position of the Guardsmen.

In retrospect, the tragedy of May 4, 1970 should not have occurred. The students may have believed that they were right in continuing their mass protest in response to the Cambodian invasion, even though this protest followed the posting and reading by the university of an order to ban rallies and an order to disperse. These orders have since been determined by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to have been lawful. unquote http://www2.kent.edu/about/history/may4/lewihen.cfm

you opened the door, can we please make sure your shock and awe posting is appropriately represented w/o sentimental emotionality!

ipse

addendum: also remember the Jackson State debacle shortly thereafter...by police!!

peter nap · Apr 21, 2015

solus said:
moral of that story is don't trap, real or perceived, and throw chunks of concrete at ARM'd guardsmen to make your Cambodia protest point!!

quote: The most important question associated with the events of May 4 is why did members of the Guard fire into a crowd of unarmed students? Two quite different answers have been advanced to this question: (1) the Guardsmen fired in self-defense, and the shootings were therefore justified and (2) the Guardsmen were not in immediate danger, and therefore the shootings were unjustified.

The answer offered by the Guardsmen is that they fired because they were in fear of their lives. Guardsmen testified before numerous investigating commissions as well as in federal court that they felt the demonstrators were advancing on them in such a way as to pose a serious and immediate threat to the safety of the Guardsmen, and they therefore had to fire in self-defense. Some authors (e.g., Michener, 1971 and Grant and Hill, 1974) agree with this assessment. Much more importantly, federal criminal and civil trials have accepted the position of the Guardsmen.

In retrospect, the tragedy of May 4, 1970 should not have occurred. The students may have believed that they were right in continuing their mass protest in response to the Cambodian invasion, even though this protest followed the posting and reading by the university of an order to ban rallies and an order to disperse. These orders have since been determined by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to have been lawful. unquote http://www2.kent.edu/about/history/may4/lewihen.cfm

you opened the door, can we please make sure your shock and awe posting is appropriately represented w/o sentimental emotionality!

ipse

addendum: also remember the Jackson State debacle shortly thereafter...by police!!

I'm not getting into that one Solus, I doubt your old enough to remember that era, but it does prove the reworded saying "don't take a chunk of concrete to a gunfight".
There was a lot more to Kent State and none of the guardsmen should have gone home that day.

solus · Apr 21, 2015

peter nap said:
I'm not getting into that one Solus, I doubt your old enough to remember that era, but it does prove the reworded saying "don't take a chunk of concrete to a gunfight".
There was a lot more to Kent State and none of the guardsmen should have gone home that day.

naw'llll i'll holde my tongue...tis the respectful thing to do in the presence of those emotionally charged who presume to be one's elder all the while believing they alone hold the stories of the tribe's folklore of oral history.

ipse

peter nap · Apr 21, 2015

solus said:
naw'llll i'll holde my tongue...tis the respectful thing to do in the presence of those emotionally charged who presume to be one's elder all the while believing they alone hold the stories of the tribe's folklore of oral history.

ipse

Well that's good. We don't have anything to argue about then because there aren't any secrets about Kent State...just differing opinions about whether the Guardsmen should have left in body bags or not.

VA National Guard OC in Staunton VA parks

HPmatt

Regular Member

skidmark

Campaign Veteran

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate

Brian D.

Regular Member

solus

Regular Member

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate

solus

Regular Member

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate