Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 127

Thread: Unintended Consequences, illegal orders

  1. #1
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849

    Post imported post

    Yesterday morning, I finally had a moment (and the nerve) to ask a military man a question I have been wanting to pose. The company for which I work is a major government and defense contractor and therefore, frequently has visitors in the building for seminars, classes, training, etc. Many times, these visitors are members of the military. I have been itching for many months to pose a question to one of these people and finally yesterday, the chance presented itself.

    The first thing I did was thank the gentleman for his service to our country. I did this for several reasons. I meant it, I wanted to set his mind at ease, and I wanted to let him see from where I was coming. Then I asked him this. (not exact quotes).

    "Suppose the military received orders from the executive office to begin the process of confiscating privately owned firearms. Knowing this would be an illegal order, would they obey this order?"

    He answered by saying "no", that he imagined most would not because they took an oath to support and defend the Constitution. I commented that one of the reasons I felt they would not is because the military personnel would also know that this action would be taking place in their own home towns against family and friends and that some would not submit without a fight. He acknowledged this and said that it would also be a violation of the Posse Comitatus act and would also violate a lot of other laws.

    So there you have it. I'm going to do this again when the opportunity arises just to see what others might have to say.


    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    az, ,
    Posts
    685

    Post imported post

    its not the military you need to worry about. its the privatized military obama wants to create that id have trouble trusting. thankfully that probly wont ever happen though

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    376

    Post imported post

    Dude, first of all lots of people in the military own guns privately. An order as such would likely never be followed by the soldiers or officers.

    The police are the people you need to worry about the most

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    az, ,
    Posts
    685

    Post imported post

    nah most police arent that bad. i know it happened in NO and i dont know what they were thinking but this discussion has come up alot over the last few months and most all LEOs say they would not partake in such an unconstitutional act

  5. #5
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849

    Post imported post

    It's not that I am worried about this happening, though there is the possibility under the current administration. My intent was to get the opinion of military personnel about this. That's really it.

    If it were actually to happen, I suspect we would see the National Guard and policing agencies involved. Maybe it would be interesting to approach a police officer with the same question.

    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    az, ,
    Posts
    685

    Post imported post

    well, im National Guard and i can tell you that my unit and I would never go around taking peoples guns. Im infantry but I know alot of MPs and they all said the same thing, it would be incredibly stupid to try and take a gun from someone, thats just asking to be shot

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    az, ,
    Posts
    685

    Post imported post

    Yea try asking the LEOs, the ones iv talked to were all cool about it but their are always the guys that have a more "the laws the law" mentality with this kind of stuff. Either way the Guard is pretty laid back unless its actually a crucial situation (ie flood, riot, terrorists) but again we are citizen soldiers, we would be more then happy to have armed citzens next to us

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    SouthernBoy wrote:
    "Suppose the military received orders from the executive office to begin the process of confiscating privately owned firearms. Knowing this would be an illegal order, would they obey this order?"
    Now this is a loaded question if there ever was one. First of all who is to say that it is an illegal order. In your opinion it is illegal but not necessarily in the eyes of the Army, Commander in Chief, courts or legislature. What you have asked if is in his opinion he was ordered to perform an illegal orrder would he. There is a lot of difference between an illegal order and one you don't agree with and if you are in the military you bettere know the difference if you refuse.

    If ordered to assinate a foreign leader would you do it? As the old joke goes about the four men applying for the job of assassin for the CIA. Each was handed a loaded gun, sent into a room with their wivesand told to killher. The first three came out and said they couldn't do it. The fourth went in and there was all kinds of loud noises and screams until he finally came out. They asked what happened and he said "Well the gun you gave me was loaded with blanks so I had to beat her to death with the chair".



  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran XD-GEM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    722

    Post imported post

    r6-rider wrote:
    nah most police arent that bad. i know it happened in NO and i dont know what they were thinking but this discussion has come up alot over the last few months and most all LEOs say they would not partake in such an unconstitutional act
    I lived through it in New Orleans. Many of the LEOs incorrectly thought they WERE operating within the law while confiscating. Given a serious enough event, you can expect the LEOs in your area to confiscate without any thought of it being illegal.

    The time to clarify it is NOW, BEFORE there's an emergency. Public hearings and information sessions between citizens and LEOs are crucial to all sides being on the same page when a SHTF situation eventually rolls around in your area.



  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    az, ,
    Posts
    685

    Post imported post

    are there any statistics on how many officers were killed trying to take citizens guns?

  11. #11
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830

    Post imported post

    codename_47 wrote:
    The police are the people you need to worry about the most
    I know a treaty was signed with Canada's armed forces to help fight civil unrest in the US, and I've heard people say the same of Mexico, but I've never seen proof. This is the sort of thing worth being concerned about. Especially when you hear Obama and Rahm openly admitting they want their youth brigades established.



    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Michigander wrote:
    codename_47 wrote:
    The police are the people you need to worry about the most
    I know a treaty was signed with Canada's armed forces to help fight civil unrest in the US, and I've heard people say the same of Mexico, but I've never seen proof. This is the sort of thing worth being concerned about. Especially when you hear Obama and Rahm openly admitting they want their youth brigades established.


    This one?

    http://www.treaty-accord.gc.ca/ViewT...eaty_ID=103615



  13. #13
    Regular Member Sonora Rebel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Gone
    Posts
    3,958

    Post imported post

    I know I'll never see it this far south... but if some Canuck comes a'knockin' for my guns... The war starts here. :X





  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    166

    Post imported post

    Sonora Rebel wrote:
    I know I'll never see it this far south... but if some Canuck comes a'knockin' for my guns... The war starts here. :X
    What if we call first, and offer money?

  15. #15
    Regular Member Sonora Rebel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Gone
    Posts
    3,958

    Post imported post

    How much ya got?

  16. #16
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Sonora Rebel wrote:
    How much ya got?
    Well, so much for patriotism.



    Some men worship rank, some worship heroes, some worship power, some worship God, & over these ideals they dispute & cannot unite--but they all worship money.
    - Mark Twain's Notebook


    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    canadian wrote:
    Sonora Rebel wrote:
    I know I'll never see it this far south... but if some Canuck comes a'knockin' for my guns... The war starts here. :X
    What if we call first, and offer money?
    No deal.

    Your central bank will make your money as worthless as ours will our own.

    (That ought to slow up the Arizona sell-out. )
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  18. #18
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote: Yep, and here are Rahm and Obama running their mouths about their private thug brigade.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgiNY5FxHBs

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s


    And a link to a government page about it.

    http://www.army.com/resources/item/4764

    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    Sonora Rebel wrote:
    I know I'll never see it this far south... but if some Canuck comes a'knockin' for my guns... The war starts here. :X



    So what are you a rebel against, anyway? Just curious.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    ParkHills, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    970

    Post imported post

    HOW MANY WILL IT TAKE ??

    Hoping that most of these numbers aren't in the hands of sheep, Obama and anyone else who attempts to dissolve the right to private gun ownership in the U.S.A. will definitely have their work cut out for them.. They better have a plan "B"

    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_g...tes_of_America

  21. #21
    Regular Member Sonora Rebel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Gone
    Posts
    3,958

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote:
    Sonora Rebel wrote:
    I know I'll never see it this far south... but if some Canuck comes a'knockin' for my guns... The war starts here. :X



    So what are you a rebel against, anyway? Just curious.
    Oh... maybe avitars of Wes Studi onna bad hair day... among other things.

  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Carnivore wrote:
    SNIP They better have a plan "B"
    "My fellow Americans. Change is the one constant in life. The one constant in history. The time has come for the next change in the history of man. We canno longer afford petty nationalism. America must stepup and take the lead in this era of globalization.

    Myfellow Americans, it is time for the North American Union."
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Sonora Rebel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Gone
    Posts
    3,958

    Post imported post

    My ancestors fought the Union once... 'Guess it's a'comer again.

  24. #24
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    SouthernBoy wrote:
    "Suppose the military received orders from the executive office to begin the process of confiscating privately owned firearms. Knowing this would be an illegal order, would they obey this order?"
    Now this is a loaded question if there ever was one. First of all who is to say that it is an illegal order. In your opinion it is illegal but not necessarily in the eyes of the Army, Commander in Chief, courts or legislature. What you have asked if is in his opinion he was ordered to perform an illegal orrder would he. There is a lot of difference between an illegal order and one you don't agree with and if you are in the military you bettere know the difference if you refuse.

    If ordered to assinate a foreign leader would you do it? As the old joke goes about the four men applying for the job of assassin for the CIA. Each was handed a loaded gun, sent into a room with their wivesand told to killher. The first three came out and said they couldn't do it. The fourth went in and there was all kinds of loud noises and screams until he finally came out. They asked what happened and he said "Well the gun you gave me was loaded with blanks so I had to beat her to death with the chair".

    While I was not of a mind to respond to any posts on this thread, I felt I had to with this one.

    The fact that the order would be illegal both in its issuance and its execution is not my opinion.. it is fact and was so echoed by the military man with whom I discussed this yesterday. It is fact because of this;

    "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."

    Notice that the first and foremost and therefore most significant and important, is deference to the binding articles of the Constitution and therefore, the Bill of Rights. All else is subordinate to this. And this includes the commander in chief. His hands are bound by the chains of both the Constitution and the Posse Comitatus act. So any order the president issues which is in direct contradiction to the Constitution et al, is not only illegal, both carries no obligation for its execution. Secondly, were the military to carry out such an order, it (they) would also be in violation of same.

    And once again, the military man of whom I asked this question pointed out on his own that not only the Constitution and Posse Comitatus would be violated but a bunch of other laws as well. He did not elaborate on this one.

    Lastly, my intent was not to start any arguments or heated discussions with this but rather to get the take from members and to see if they might want to try the same thing and see what transpires.

    Just had to set that one straight, gentlemen. If we did not have these protections, we would be nothing more than a military dictatorship.

    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Frederica, Delaware, USA
    Posts
    55

    Post imported post

    Thank you Southernboy.

    I was, in fact, of the same mindset as you. I felt I needed to reply. And you got it all down.

    One point I would like to add is that during the Nuremburg trials, the Nazi leaders that claimed they were 'just following orders' did not get off the hook. They were also responsible for the crimes committed whether or not they took part in them because they had full knowledge of what they were doing.

    I hold steadfastly to military members questioning an order as invalid as this first, passing that up their chain of command, and risking punishment for directly disobeying last.

    I surely hope that our military members haven't been so indoctrinated to unthinkingly obeying such an order.

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •