Military and LEO's, help make this go viral!

[rondog]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nF098HtY-s

[GlockDog47]

Damn right! Good video

[HoneyBadger]

Shared this on Facebook yesterday and already had 18 of my friends "life" it. This is encouraging.

[HBARleatherneck]

delete

[HBARleatherneck]

delete

[Teufelhund]

You have some good points, HBAR. I respectfully disagree.

Over the past several weeks, and with increasing frequency we are hearing from Sheriffs, LE, and commanding officers of various military units all issuing statements that equate to "we will not comply." I have confidence in the indelible American spirit and I think there are more than we can see who have already made up their minds that they will do whatever it takes. I hope so anyway; otherwise why should any of us care to save it?

[HBARleatherneck]

delete

[brokenscout]

I agree completely..
I have been in 22 countries when deployed with the USMC. I have seen the kind of people who revolt, who stand against the government. And in my experience, they were poor, with NOTHING to lose. They were already hungry, they already jobless. They didnt have any reason to sit and be satisfied with the status quo. But, Americans have had it good, for so many generations, that they have no clue. Most couldnt go a night without shelter and warmth. Couldnt go a day without food. This is why our people will turn against their own citizens. They will not want to be cold and hungry.


dont get me wrong. i know these people have families and children to feed. nobody is going to want to lose their ability to house and feed their family.

[Fmedges]

The year I deployed I made the most amount of money thatI did during my enlistment, a whole $17,000. We know the the majority of the Corps is E3 and below. They are not exactly making it rain.

[hatidua]

A paycheck, food in the fridge, and a roof over the family are convincing motivators to do as told.

[HBARleatherneck]

delete

[cstone]

I have been in 22 countries when deployed with the USMC. I have seen the kind of people who revolt, who stand against the government. And in my experience, they were poor, with NOTHING to lose. They were already hungry, they already jobless. They didnt have any reason to sit and be satisfied with the status quo. But, Americans have had it good, for so many generations, that they have no clue. Most couldnt go a night without shelter and warmth. Couldnt go a day without food. This is why our people will turn against their own citizens. They will not want to be cold and hungry.


dont get me wrong. i know these people have families and children to feed. nobody is going to want to lose their ability to house and feed their family.

While I respect your experience and service, your description does not describe a single member of our Founding Fathers. Each of them had much more to lose than gain by openly declaring Independence from Great Britain. If the call comes, each of us will answer according to our conscience. 20+ years ago, when I entered the profession, I had some ideas about what I was willing to do and what I could not do. I am not the same man that I was when I entered the profession, but at my core, I have the same principles and my integrity is intact. I guess we will see, when we see.

God, Family, Country.

Be safe.

[Troublco]

"And it cant be wrong if our superiors at the Department told us to do it."


I get the other part of your comment, and there's a lot of truth there. I think we have to hope, pray, count on, whatever you want to call it, that people understand that if we continue letting these things go that what we will ultimately end up with is worse. When we started this country a whole bunch of people with things to lose understood what the deal was, and fought anyway. Many died, many families were left without the man of the house. I think a lot of people today are thinking hard about what they will do if the time comes to make the decision. I pray they are, anyhow; I hope they think about it before they really have to make that decision.

But, I remember my training regarding Lawful orders. The example they used was the Nazi's defense at Nuremberg that they were "just following orders"; and how that doesn't wash. If you're ordered to do something you know is wrong, it is your duty to disobey that order. Even if threatened with consequences. Let's hope everyone in a uniform remembers that.


ETA - and I see that CStone beat me to part of what I was saying, while I was saying it...[ROFL1]

[Byte Stryke]

Then again there is the possibility of becoming a rope tester following the war-crimes tribunal

[Aloha_Shooter]

Professional Military Education hammers home the point about lawful orders every chance they get. My Lai is raised constantly as an example of when it's the NCO's or officer's duty to disobey. Unfortunately, we have some people in uniform that get off on the power -- the power of being Law Enforcement or the power of being able to use heavy weapons. Fortunately, we have far more people who take their oaths of office or enlistment very very seriously. While I've seen a creep of the entitlement mentality into some of the Armed Forces over the last 20 years, I do NOT concur with HBAR's or hatidua's assessments that most would follow a paycheck and meekly follow illegal orders. I wonder how much of this is projection -- why are you so certain current members would meekly go along if you wouldn't?

The biggest problem with any of this conspiracy theory garbage is that the decision makers would be faced with huge uncertainties in what forces they could count on.

[HBARleatherneck]

delete

[Aloha_Shooter]

At thsi point, I feel it's appropriate to insert this:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROxvT8KKdFw

[shithitsfan]

[Ronin13]

The only problem with all this is....

REALITY!!!

When the time comes, it will be a choice between doing their job and getting a paycheck. Or going against their friends, superiors and losing their fancy home, SUV, boat, etc.

I sincerely doubt, most LEO and Military will go against the government. At least as long as paychecks are being direct deposited into their accounts. People like the comfort of a paycheck. "And it cant be wrong if our superiors at the Department told us to do it."



thats alot more money than 0.

and threats of imprisonment or worse can be a motivator.
Following unlawful/unconstitutional orders is a terrible excuse. Every soldier, sailor, marine, airman, LEO, etc. has a DUTY to disobey unlawful orders. To violate the people's right to bear arms is, I think, about one of the most clear cut examples of an unlawful/unconstitutional order. By doing so could mean a lot more than just "not getting a paycheck." Last time I checked treason carries a much harsher sentence than simple imprisonment.

[HBARleatherneck]

delete

[hatidua]

It's all how you sell it. I wonder how much hesitation there was when it came to burning a whole bunch of women & children alive in a place called Waco? Was there any trembling of the index finger before letting a round fly at a pregnant woman from a nice comfortable distance at a place called Ruby Ridge? Much debate before going door to door to confiscate firearms after a hurricane in New Orleans?If it's one thing Americans are susceptible to, it's a good sales pitch. Label an individual, a family, or a group "terrorists" and all bets are decidedly off.

[Mick-Boy]

-- why are you so certain current members would meekly go along if you wouldn't?


Not to speak for the man, but maybe he's a student of history. Off the top of my head

**MacArthur’s attack on the “Bonus Army” veterans in 1932. Infantry, horse cavalry and tanks were used, if I recall correctly.

**The Japanese internment during WW2. That was illegal and morally repugnant, yet where was the push-back from police and the military?

**The raid on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco Texas. Hugely illegal, yet how many military units were involved through Posse Comitatus work arounds?

**The raid on Ruby Ridge. Yet again, hugely illegal. It all shook out in court years later, but that’s a tough consolation to Randy Weaver...

**New Orleans, in the aftermath of hurricane Katrina. Think local cops and the military are too concerned with civil rights to go door to door and confiscate firearms? …Think again (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X9JkSudCX4).

As long as they (the authority issuing the instructions) can marginalize the targets, they will have no problem finding people to follow confiscation orders.

[Mick-Boy]

Following unlawful/unconstitutional orders is a terrible excuse. Every soldier, sailor, marine, airman, LEO, etc. has a DUTY to disobey unlawful orders. To violate the people's right to bear arms is, I think, about one of the most clear cut examples of an unlawful/unconstitutional order. By doing so could mean a lot more than just "not getting a paycheck." Last time I checked treason carries a much harsher sentence than simple imprisonment.


How many of these (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf8trl69kzo) folks were charged with treason Ronin?

[Dave]

If some of these politicians want to confiscate guns then they should go door to door themselves instead of putting LEO's and Guardsmen (more likely to be used than active duty) in positions where they are likely to knock on a door and end up staring at the wrong end of a 12 gauge barrel.

[Mick-Boy]

The fact of the matter is that a lot of the "brass" in the military doesn't like guns.. and they certainly don't like guns in the hands of someone they can't directly control.

I have to carry USGOV document that tells people to fuck off when I travel around Afghanistan because I constantly get challenge about my weapons (and the fact that they are *GASP* loaded). Look at Gen McChrystal's statements about assault weapons. Look at the CG (Jacoby) of the Alaska National Guard telling his people that they weren't allowed to have a carry permit for off duty carry. Seriously just look at the firearms rules on a US military installation and tell me that the people running the show are pro-gun..

I won't get into LEOs because that's not my lane but the statements and stances of their organizations (FOP and the IAPC for instance) doesn't put a smile on my face...

[Ronin13]

cops have been confiscating firearms for years, cops have been enforcing unconstitutional laws for years. wake up ronin. it has never stopped any of them.


How many of these (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf8trl69kzo) folks were charged with treason Ronin?
I was speaking in theory that's how it works... not how it is in actuality. If people would wake up and smell the blatant violation, then yes, they would be justified in disobeying unlawful orders when given...

[lead_magnet]

cops have been confiscating firearms for years, cops have been enforcing unconstitutional laws for years. wake up ronin. it has never stopped any of them.

I've never confiscated any firearms from anyone who wasn't a felon, or using them in the commission of a crime. Tell me again how I'm a British agent, still in my red coat as I sneak into your life and steal your guns.. I've read the constitution, and I love it more than my own life. Go grab a skateboard and buy some more stickers about how I oppress you.
- the EVIL tyrant cop

[HBARleatherneck]

delete

[lead_magnet]

All of that ^ being said. I agree with the OP. We need to spread this message, those those teetering on the fence are too dumb (I assure) you to be persuaded by a cool video. We are the evil gun loving folk, and you won't change their minds. What I've stated before stands, everyone in my department has agreed that should confiscation become a law, we are all looking for new jobs, plus a few other things, that I cannot mention on a public forum.

[lead_magnet]

ok, dont be a dumbass. i didnt say you. i didnt say every cop. but wake up, cops have been enforcing unconstitutional gun laws in several state, confiscating guns during katrina, etc.

you apologists dont want to face the fact that it happens and it will happen. i am happy that a cop in the middle of nowhere is on our side. i am happy that You are a good person, and You intend to quit your job before doing anything unconstitutional. that doesnt change the fact that many others will fill your space and keep on marching on. especially if the only jobs and food available were those jobs.

I see your point here. (MODS: please don't kill this thread, it's going somewhere good, don't puss out) The reasons why my puny little voice from out in the middle of nowhere counts for something is this. EVERY, and that means EVERY C.S.P. patrolman woman that I've spoken to has my same views. All of the CSPD officers I know feel the same way. All of the firearms instructors in my academy lectured us for 30 min specifically on this topic. There was a "come to Jesus" (inside joke there) speech about how your opinion (the cop) doesn't matter, as you are a public servant, so only the public's opinion matters.

There are many, many more of us "good guys" wearing a cop's uniform than you think brother, don't worry about the cops, very few of us are goody two-shoes. In fact, I don't know one who is. The people you should be worrying about are the DHS guys and the nasty girls.

I can't go into more on here, but trust me, there is much more planned, than "handing in our badges"

[sellersm]

One question that no one's addressing is this: why do we think it's the LEO/.mil that will be doing anything on behalf of the gubment 'take over' orders? History shows us that it's often relegated to the place of (gasp) the criminal population? Anyone a student of Nazi Germany? Who did they use as guards? How was that organization run and why was it successful? Study a little and you'll see that they employed the prison population, ran it as a 'successful' business and it worked out quite well! They (.gov) didn't need to use the SS or LE or anyone else to do the 'dirty work'...

I know this is slightly OT for this post, but when folks are discussing this 'issue', no one seems to remember history (well, except for Mick-Boy with some excellent points and a few others)... Guess who has the biggest prison population on the planet? Just a thought.

[HBARleatherneck]

delete

[Teufelhund]

One question that no one's addressing is this: why do we think it's the LEO/.mil that will be doing anything on behalf of the gubment 'take over' orders? History shows us that it's often relegated to the place of (gasp) the criminal population? Anyone a student of Nazi Germany? Who did they use as guards? How was that organization run and why was it successful? Study a little and you'll see that they employed the prison population, ran it as a 'successful' business and it worked out quite well! They (.gov) didn't need to use the SS or LE or anyone else to do the 'dirty work'...

I know this is slightly OT for this post, but when folks are discussing this 'issue', no one seems to remember history (well, except for Mick-Boy with some excellent points and a few others)... Guess who has the biggest prison population on the planet? Just a thought.

Send drug addicts and thugs to my house? Oh man, I really hope that's their tactic. Please don't throw me in that briar patch.

[Danimal]

i hope you are right.

But, its easy to talk big. Its harder to stand on principle when you and your children are hungry.

I really hope you are right.

This is true, that is why the rest of us in positions where we could provide jobs and other work by those who would be making this choice need to voice our support. Let them know that we stand behind them and there will be a job waiting for them should it come to that. Support them so that they may do the right thing in confidence.

[muddywings]

I've been in/out of reading this thread all morning and from my perspective (form mil and a short stint as LEO [EPSO]) I think there are a lot of factors that will play out but the most unmentioned one I'll hit at the end.

I think the confiscation issue will be pretty localized. We'll see Chicago, Detroit, CA, NY try to pull something extreme. I am a bit worried about our lopsided CO gov so that could be an interesting toss up. I think down here in El Paso, we could see an interesting struggle between County and City.

In the end, I think a lot of local LEO will do a wait and see who goes first and in general it will be legal chaos. We've already established, via 64, that we can give the middle finger to federal statutes but I don't think this GOV will roll over on 'assault weapons' like they did on pot. During this wait and see, if there was a AWB, hopefully we'll see a slaughtering at the polls come 2016 and we could see the D side of the senate go R with as many vulnerable spots they have (vs. R). If something does pass I could see a repeat of 94-96 and whatever passes would hopefully get repealed.

I really don't see MIL and LEO doing door by door no-knock searches. The Dems are perfectly happy allowing the "no transfer" portion of their supposed bill to allow attrition to remove weapons from everybody (except criminals). So what I am more worried about are the local DAs. Have you ever seen Chris Rock's "how not to talk to the police." You know the one I'm going to talk about.... crazy spouse yelling, "He's got weed, he's got weed." Pissed off girlfriends, spouses, business partners reporting people out of a grudge (reference recent issue with New Jersey cop). It's one thing to have your AR sitting in your safe not harming a soul but when the LEO gets a report of unlicensed AR-15 in someone's house, are they going to turn a blind eye and ignore the report? If not, will the DA prosecute?

For being in LEO for a short time, I really can't say on how all that would play out but that is where I can see confiscation coming from: "concerned citizens." Would the DAs ignore people reporting the 'crime?'

[Clint45]

A paycheck, food in the fridge, and a roof over the family are convincing motivators to do as told.

Federal prison, loss of pension, felony convictions, and dishonorable discharge will motivate lots of people to "just take orders." After all, everyone knows cops and soldiers are the "good guys." Most cops and soldiers are drowning in debt and living from paycheck to paycheck. They won't risk losing their job and status. Disobey an order = lose right to own a gun.