• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

How the US Military Would Put Down an Armed Rebellion

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but we were taught both initially and throughout my military career this this would be verboten.

Specifically, the "experts" say:

"The government would invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 to form a response:

From Title 10 US Code the President may use the militia or Armed Forces to:

§ 331 – Suppress an insurrection against a State government at the request of the Legislature or, if not in session, the Governor.

§ 332 – Suppress unlawful obstruction or rebellion against the U.S.

§ 333 – Suppress insurrection or domestic violence if it (1) hinders the execution of the laws to the extent that a part or class of citizens are deprived of Constitutional rights and the State is unable or refuses to protect those rights or (2) obstructs the execution of any Federal law or impedes the course of justice under Federal laws.)​

What if, commensurate with §'s 331, 332, and 333, it's not an "insurrection" but a restoration much the same as the Battle of Athens, sometimes called the McMinn County War. It was a restoration of Constitutional, state, and local law led by citizens in Athens and Etowah, Tennessee, United States, against the local and corrupt government in August 1946. The citizens, including some World War II veterans, accused the local officials of predatory policing, police brutality, political corruption and voter intimidation.

I know very few individuals who would ever participate in an insurrection against a lawfully-elected government. I know many, however, who would respond appropriately to stop the unlawful actions of a wayward government i.e. one that was no longer acting in the lawful capacity to which they were elected.

Comments, please.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
once again the basic premise since9...they who win write the history of how it went down...

not only is mcbeth correct, they will just act. some factions already have...

long hot summer comes to mind.

ipse
 

Maverick9

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
1,404
Location
Mid-atlantic
Yeah, in such times, it's better to be part of a roving band of criminals than an organized, law-abiding group of citizens trying to uphold the constitutional amendments.

Gubmints can act against the lawful. They can do nothing against the unlawful.

Ironic, huh?

In Brazil, they just don't send officers into the slums. Too dangerous.

Here if someone acted up, they'd just seize bank accounts, cut pensions, maybe even tactically (accidentally?) bomb a city. All law-abiding guys would say 'oh-kaay, here's my pew-pews', and turn to using baseball bats, if they're even allowed to defend themselves (in Britain, you're really not allowed to defend yourself).
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Yeah, in such times, it's better to be part of a roving band of criminals than an organized, law-abiding group of citizens trying to uphold the constitutional amendments.

Gubmints can act against the lawful. They can do nothing against the unlawful.

Ironic, huh?

In Brazil, they just don't send officers into the slums. Too dangerous.

Here if someone acted up, they'd just seize bank accounts, cut pensions, maybe even tactically (accidentally?) bomb a city. All law-abiding guys would say 'oh-kaay, here's my pew-pews', and turn to using baseball bats, if they're even allowed to defend themselves (in Britain, you're really not allowed to defend yourself).

no maybe...authorities dropping a bomb on the city has already been done and it wasn't an accident...

quote: Her West Philadelphia neighborhood — now nearly vacant and eerily quiet — never recovered from the city’s horrific botched attempt to arrest the MOVE members on May 13, 1985. The violent confrontation marked the first time authorities in the United States had dropped a bomb on American citizens. ... killing five children and six adult members of the militant group MOVE and incinerating 61 row homes. unquote
http://newsone.com/516432/philly-neighborhood-still-hurt-from-police-bomb-that-blew-up-61-homes/

ipse
 
Last edited:

Maverick9

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
1,404
Location
Mid-atlantic
no maybe...authorities dropping a bomb on the city has already been done and it wasn't an accident...

quote: Her West Philadelphia neighborhood — now nearly vacant and eerily quiet — never recovered from the city’s horrific botched attempt to arrest the MOVE members on May 13, 1985. The violent confrontation marked the first time authorities in the United States had dropped a bomb on American citizens. ... killing five children and six adult members of the militant group MOVE and incinerating 61 row homes. unquote
http://newsone.com/516432/philly-neighborhood-still-hurt-from-police-bomb-that-blew-up-61-homes/

ipse

Well, while true, they've dropped other bombs. Fortunately they hadn't/haven't exploded yet.
http://mentalfloss.com/article/17483/8-nuclear-weapons-us-has-lost

o Somewhere near Goldsboro, North Carolina 1961;
o The United States lost a warhead off of Tybee Island, Georgia, in 1958;
o Somewhere in the Pacific enroute from Alaska to Texas, 1950 - near or far from the coast is unknown;
o Somewhere off McDill AFB in Florida, 1956.

After that and the incident in Japan (`65)(*), basically they stopped reporting those types of incidents openly.

Source: Wikipedia
Broken Arrow refers to an accidental event that involves nuclear weapons, warheads or components, but which does not create the risk of nuclear war... As of September 2013, the US Department of Defense has officially recognized 32 "Broken Arrow" incidents

(*) It took them 15 years to admit it and then they lied and said it was 500 miles off the coast. It was ~80 miles off the coast of the Ryuku Island chain.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Well, while true, they've dropped other bombs. Fortunately they hadn't/haven't exploded yet.
http://mentalfloss.com/article/17483/8-nuclear-weapons-us-has-lost

o Somewhere near Goldsboro, North Carolina 1961;
o The United States lost a warhead off of Tybee Island, Georgia, in 1958;
o Somewhere in the Pacific enroute from Alaska to Texas, 1950 - near or far from the coast is unknown;
o Somewhere off McDill AFB in Florida, 1956.

After that and the incident in Japan (`65)(*), basically they stopped reporting those types of incidents openly.

Source: Wikipedia


(*) It took them 15 years to admit it and then they lied and said it was 500 miles off the coast. It was ~80 miles off the coast of the Ryuku Island chain.

In the Philly bombing they missed their target and it detonated on a neighboring bldg. ... but its Philly ....
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
A mayor orders his top cop to confiscate all guns, go house to house, to maintain law and order, to maintain the peace, until the current crisis has passed.

How many of the local cops will comply with this order? How many county/state cops will assist. Imagine, your neighbor is one of those cops.

Look to post hurricane Katrina governmental acts to find the answer.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,949
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
A mayor orders his top cop to confiscate all guns, go house to house, to maintain law and order, to maintain the peace, until the current crisis has passed.

How many of the local cops will comply with this order? How many county/state cops will assist. Imagine, your neighbor is one of those cops.

Look to post hurricane Katrina governmental acts to find the answer.
Cops will conveniently forget they signed an oath of office.

Lawful order comes to mind.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
I am reminded of the ole saw...your gun, or food on my table. The cop will choose feeding his kids over your gun. Hey, ya might get a receipt for your gun...to be used to re-claim your gun after the current crisis has passed. ;)
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
past nc governor, bev purde, had that concept handed to her by the nc SCourt when she declared a statewide state of emergency over impending snow which by statute prohibiting carrying firearm, lg & handguns.

Second Amendment sued...oh wait ncgr was included after their me to, me to, me to mantra, and won and within a couple weeks the no firearm provision quietly fell out of the state of emergency statutes.

but a question arises, if national is mobilized...do they, without formal blet 101, now have arrest, ad nauseam powers, especially since their mantra is defend the constitution which is lacking in our le's oath.

ipse
 
Last edited:

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
That meme existed prior to the Internet. With every individual capable of starting a blog, it no longer exists.

it doesn't ?

Putin and the Ukraine

Erdoğan and his mythical coup

he who won wrote the history!!!

no internet involved!

ipse
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
I am reminded of the ole saw...your gun, or food on my table. The cop will choose feeding his kids over your gun. Hey, ya might get a receipt for your gun...to be used to re-claim your gun after the current crisis has passed. ;)

Ya just might get a receipt ... those people in New Orleans did not and most did not get their guns back....even after a "favorable" court decision.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
it doesn't ?

No, it doesn't. The items on your list are prime examples, prima facia evidence that your claim of "they who win write the history of how it went down" is no longer valid. Each and every one of these has been written about endlessly from all sides, not merely the side of the winners:

Putin and the Ukraine

Erdoğan and his mythical coup

Exactly. The Internet doesn't provide objectivity. Rather, it provides hyper-perspective. For example, one can read about Putin and the Ukraine from many different perspectives, conducting additional research to determine what's fact and what's hogwash, while making up one's own damned mind while utterly rejecting, with reason, the perspective of the winner (or faction in power) as reflected in mainstream media.

he who won wrote the history!!!

Not any more, and continuing to claim this new falsehood as truth does not make it true. Neither do triple exclamation points.

no internet involved!

Of course the Internet's involved. That's the point, solus.

In fact, "A majority of U.S. adults – 62% – get news on social media, and 18% do so often, according to a new survey by Pew Research Center, conducted in association with the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. In 2012, based on a slightly different question, 49% of U.S. adults reported seeing news on social media." (Gottfied, J. and Shearer, E. (May 26, 2016). "News Use Across Social Media Platforms 2016." Journalism & Media, PewResearch Center. Retrieved from: http://www.journalism.org/2016/05/26/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2016/. Link.

Yes, one can find every opinion under the Sun on the Internet. But one also finds opinions ranging from heavily slanted to outright lies on mainstream media. The difference is that when someone listens to mainstream media, they rarely double-check (vet) the claims, whereas when I see a claim on the Internet, I check it with multiple sources of proven reliability, such as the Pew Research Center, the reference for the preceding quote.

The same can be said for the Internet as for mainstream media: Trust nothing; vet everything.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Ya just might get a receipt ... those people in New Orleans did not and most did not get their guns back....even after a "favorable" court decision.

That's not what the NRA-ILA says. They were the ones who secured that favorable court decision: "The city dragged its feet in returning confiscated firearms to their lawful owners. However, NRA persisted until 2008, when NRA and New Orleans came to a settlement in which the city agreed to carry out an acceptable procedure for returning the firearms. The agreement allowed owners to get back their guns without documented proof of ownership, which many residents were understandably unable to provide."

Link.

Do you have any objective evidence that supports your claim that "most did not get their guns back?"
 
Last edited:
Top