• 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.

What are we fighting for??

armyof1

New member
Joined
Sep 23, 2010
Messages
1
Location
Wisconsin
Currently I am in the Army. I joined for protection of rights and college. In our enlistment it says:

Excerpt taken directly from contract:
"I, [your name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the State of [WI for me] 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 Governor of [WI for me] and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the law and regulations. So help me God."

I don't know, maybe my idea of an enemy is different than the rest. To me anyone who opposes the constitution is an enemy. Then again that is my opinion. Either way I see it, I have served to uphold both everyone's rights to openly carry a form of protection, and for those who oppose to speak against it. The fact that people are so against it just shows that we as Americans have been lax on our rights. I know as soon as I get back from Fort Campbell I am going to be more into exercising my rights. After carrying one for so long and then not, it will feel good to have another by my side again.
 

Daylen

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
2,223
Location
America
For a long time people, mostly from urban areas, have chosen to give their responsibility to the govt in return for greater security. Also, social conservatives have worked to put in laws, which criminalize many behaviors that do not harm anyone, but thus being illegalized created a way for criminals to make money at being a criminal. In short society has given up liberty and the responsibility of self reliance for security and now we have neither security nor liberty.
 

xenophon

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2008
Messages
316
Location
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
Currently I am in the Army. I joined for protection of rights and college. In our enlistment it says:

Excerpt taken directly from contract:
"I, [your name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the State of [WI for me] 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 Governor of [WI for me] and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the law and regulations. So help me God."

I don't know, maybe my idea of an enemy is different than the rest. To me anyone who opposes the constitution is an enemy. Then again that is my opinion. Either way I see it, I have served to uphold both everyone's rights to openly carry a form of protection, and for those who oppose to speak against it. The fact that people are so against it just shows that we as Americans have been lax on our rights. I know as soon as I get back from Fort Campbell I am going to be more into exercising my rights. After carrying one for so long and then not, it will feel good to have another by my side again.

Good first post, and welcome. Glad to see you are from WI, as I am. We are a hot state for open carry. Partly because CC is illegal, and open carry just started heating up in the past few years due to it being the ONLY legal manner to carry. And partly because of the RESISTANCE of many state officials over something that is completely legal.

Thanks for your service, and for upholding the Constitution.
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
Your belief that anyone who opposes the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, is your enemy is a correct stance to take. And to take this a step further, any orders issued which countermand these two documents are, by definition, illegal and not subject to being obeyed. That and the fact that anyone who issues such orders is not only breaking the law, but is also guilty of a treasonous action.

Thank you for your service to our nation.
 

KansasMustang

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
1,005
Location
Herington, Kansas, USA
For a long time people, mostly from urban areas, have chosen to give their responsibility to the govt in return for greater security. Also, social conservatives have worked to put in laws, which criminalize many behaviors that do not harm anyone, but thus being illegalized created a way for criminals to make money at being a criminal. In short society has given up liberty and the responsibility of self reliance for security and now we have neither security nor liberty.

Methinks you have the responsible parties WRONG sir. It's the LIBERALS that have criminalized many and made it a criminal offense to violate the "rights" of the criminals" Every CONSERVATIVE I know wants LESS government interference and more freedom IE GUN rights. Less restrictions on every aspect of self determination and responsibility/reliability
 

propertymanager

Regular Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
27
Location
, ,
Every CONSERVATIVE I know wants LESS government interference and more freedom IE GUN rights.

I agree that every REAL CONSERVATIVE wants less government and more freedom. On the other hand, we have MANY RINOS pretending to be conservatives. For example, here in Ohio we have John Kasich running for Governor as a Republican. He voted FOR the assault weapons ban and FOR the Washington D.C. gun ban, in addition to his MANY other anti-2nd Amendment votes. As a former veteran myself, I consider him a TRAITOR to his oath of office, "to protect and defend the constituion of the United States"!!!
 

MamaLiberty

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
894
Location
Newcastle, Wyoming, USA
Why does it seem good to anyone that ANY of our human rights and responsibilities are EVER subject to any "vote?" I own my life and body. That is not up to anyone else to decide.
 

rodbender

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
2,519
Location
Navasota, Texas, USA
Daylen said:
For a long time people, mostly from urban areas, have chosen to give their responsibility to the govt in return for greater security. Also, social conservatives have worked to put in laws, which criminalize many behaviors that do not harm anyone, but thus being illegalized created a way for criminals to make money at being a criminal. In short society has given up liberty and the responsibility of self reliance for security and now we have neither security nor liberty.

Methinks you have the responsible parties WRONG sir. It's the LIBERALS that have criminalized many and made it a criminal offense to violate the "rights" of the criminals" Every CONSERVATIVE I know wants LESS government interference and more freedom IE GUN rights. Less restrictions on every aspect of self determination and responsibility/reliability

It sounds to me as if he was talking about drug laws. There is no provision in the Constitution for the feds to ban drugs or it's use. This should be left to the states.
 
Last edited:

MamaLiberty

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
894
Location
Newcastle, Wyoming, USA
It sounds to me as if he was talking about drug laws. There is no provision in the Constitution for the feds to ban drugs or it's use. This should be left to the states.

Where do "states" get the authority to micromanage your life any more than the feds?

Again: who owns your life and body? The "state" certainly doesn't own mine, whatever they pretend.
 

rodbender

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
2,519
Location
Navasota, Texas, USA
rodbender said:
It sounds to me as if he was talking about drug laws. There is no provision in the Constitution for the feds to ban drugs or it's use. This should be left to the states.

Where do "states" get the authority to micromanage your life any more than the feds?

Again: who owns your life and body? The "state" certainly doesn't own mine, whatever they pretend.

I was actually referring to the powers granted the feds by the Constitution. There is a list of things (see Art. I, Sec. 10) in the Constitution that prohibits what states can do. Other than that, the states can do whatever they please, according to the Constitution.

The states actually get their authority to do anything they do from the people of that particular state. If the people don't stand up against it, the state can and will do it.
 

rotorhead

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2010
Messages
862
Location
FL
I don't consent - and never did. I didn't sign or consent to either the fed or state "constitution."

I'm much like ML here. The concept of trading my liberty over to a form of government in exchange for their "protection" and other services I've never asked for nor wanted seems highly ironic to me, and rather insulting. I don't much like the idea of being forced to pay for things I have a moral objection to at gunpoint with the threat of jail hanging over my head, either.

However armyof1, you have given your word in the form of an oath to the Federal Government, and to some extent your state of residence (yes, the National Guard is under Federal jurisdiction and control- has been since the Wilson administration), so do the best job you can while in. All I'm saying is keep your eyes open while you do it. Do your best to match up what you are told with what really is and see what you come up with, that's all.

Good luck to you.
 

rodbender

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
2,519
Location
Navasota, Texas, USA
MamaLiberty said:
I don't consent - and never did. I didn't sign or consent to either the fed or state "constitution."

Somebody before you obviously didn't mind.

I'm much like ML here. The concept of trading my liberty over to a form of government in exchange for their "protection" and other services I've never asked for nor wanted seems highly ironic to me, and rather insulting. I don't much like the idea of being forced to pay for things I have a moral objection to at gunpoint with the threat of jail hanging over my head, either.

I agree with both of you.

You two need to get to work fixing it, within your state and the feds, if it's that big an issue for you.
 

MamaLiberty

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
894
Location
Newcastle, Wyoming, USA
Somebody before you obviously didn't mind.
I agree with both of you.

You two need to get to work fixing it, within your state and the feds, if it's that big an issue for you.

You just don't get the point. I didn't break it and I have no obligation to "fix" it.

If your neighbor signs a contract that says YOU are obligated to pay for HIS child's college degree, do you just meekly pay? I think not.
 

rodbender

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
2,519
Location
Navasota, Texas, USA
You just don't get the point. I didn't break it and I have no obligation to "fix" it.

If your neighbor signs a contract that says YOU are obligated to pay for HIS child's college degree, do you just meekly pay? I think not.

Like I said before, "I agree with both of you". But then, I'm not the one bitchin' about it. Don't just bitch about it, do something about it.
 

rotorhead

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2010
Messages
862
Location
FL
Somebody before you obviously didn't mind.



I agree with both of you.

You two need to get to work fixing it, within your state and the feds, if it's that big an issue for you.

I do what I can, however I do understand the concept of legal restrictions :)

I used to be a dyed in the wool follower of the American form of government, in fact I did 20 years in the army and retired. It wasn't until all that was over did I sit back and actually think of some of this stuff.
Really, it's not something I'm going around stressing over and making it the forefront of my existence, but more something worth talking over when I see a chance to.

Cheers.
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,221
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
@ Armyof1.... Have you also joined the OATHKEEPERS (google it if you haven't heard of them). Remember, in a situation like the Katrina fiasco, orders to disarm the law abiding populace violate the Constitution and are therefore unlawful.

@ Rotorhead.... what airframe? I did a tour on RH-53's configured as cargo ships. My late wifes brother did AIMD rotor work for Marine choppers in El Toro. My step son is currently crew chief on BlackHawks in Germany.

Personally, after working on the CH-53's and seeing how many little parts could fail and put you down, I want the spinny thing in the front. So I fly 172's these days.
 

rotorhead

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2010
Messages
862
Location
FL
@ Armyof1.... Have you also joined the OATHKEEPERS (google it if you haven't heard of them). Remember, in a situation like the Katrina fiasco, orders to disarm the law abiding populace violate the Constitution and are therefore unlawful.

@ Rotorhead.... what airframe? I did a tour on RH-53's configured as cargo ships. My late wifes brother did AIMD rotor work for Marine choppers in El Toro. My step son is currently crew chief on BlackHawks in Germany.

Personally, after working on the CH-53's and seeing how many little parts could fail and put you down, I want the spinny thing in the front. So I fly 172's these days.

Nice.

I've worked on many but my main was the AH-64.
 

rotorhead

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2010
Messages
862
Location
FL
Welcome to the forums Rotorhead and i agree with what you said 100 percent. On a side note....does BdG mean anything to you? If not..it's no big deal, i just knew a Rotorhead from that group.

Thanks!

And no, doesn't ring a bell with me. I have no doubts that my use of this name is most likely not unique though. Knowing this, we should all do our best to stamp out all impostors leaving me with exclusive rights to the name! :p
 
Top