Where do LEOs and Military Members stand? With American people or w/ Politicians? - Page 3

Where do LEOs and Military Members stand? With American people or w/ Politicians?

This is a discussion on Where do LEOs and Military Members stand? With American people or w/ Politicians? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Just look to the Red Flag "laws" for your answer. All too many "LEOs" are enforcing that violation of several US Constitutional protections. Just sayin'....

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 69
Like Tree173Likes

Thread: Where do LEOs and Military Members stand? With American people or w/ Politicians?

  1. #31
    Distinguished Member
    Array PPS1980's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    The Free State of Georgia
    Posts
    1,494
    Just look to the Red Flag "laws" for your answer. All too many "LEOs" are enforcing that violation of several US Constitutional protections. Just sayin'.
    __________________
    I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.
    - Thomas Jefferson 1787
    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
    NRA Life Member - Member GA Carry Organization

  2. #32
    VIP Member Array OldChap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,533
    Quote Originally Posted by 1942bull View Post
    Actually, isn’t that a great word, the topic of this thread is “Where do LEOs and Military Members stand? With American people or w/ politicians.”. That is the topic I addressed not some nonsensical notio that POLS could ever get the Military to nuke Americans.

    As an afterthought I actually am not inclined to go into bunkers. I should not have used that reference. If you ever see photos of Marines running into bunkers and diving into slit trenches during the assault of Khe San in Nam, know that I took many of them. I never took a photo in a bunker because I never went into one. However I did dive into numerous slit trenches. “Discretion is the better part of valor”.
    Did you read the OPs post?

    This is a question related to the reply made by Rep. Swalwell about a civil war in the United States over the conversation would be brief due to the governments possession of nuclear weapons. First off, I do not think that the evening politicians are stupid enough to use nuclear weapons within the borders of the United States on American citizens. I also think he may underestimate the fortitude of some of the more ardent Constitution supporters.
    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits."

  3. #33
    VIP Member Array jmf552's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    6,224
    Quote Originally Posted by paulinsf View Post
    That was exactly the point that I was going to make. One must also look too at how the laws are implemented. If the government announced a date after which all firearms would be totally banned, then LE and the military might stand up and refuse. More likely though, the path will be the one of baby steps, make this or that specific weapon or behavior illegal, it's a little thing. Certainly not important enough to quit my job over. After all i still have to feed my family and pay my bills. The problem with those baby steps is that they eventually get to the same place - a total ban. It is like that frog in the water that is slowly coming to a boil. By the time he figures out what is going on it is too late. He is already frog soup.
    I agree with the frog analogy, although my prediction is that they won't go for a total ban. It would be too hard to implement and create too much backlash. I think we have seen the gist of the plan in some of the more anti-gun states and the Australian model the liberals are so fond of. They will require all the guns to and owners to be registered and permitted. They will prohibit anything that holds over 10 rounds. They will restrict how different classes of guns can be used and transported. They will be able to inspect your "collection" anytime they want. They will have a buyback or amnesty for prohibited weapons.

    A lot of people won't comply. the gov't will do some token raids and busts, but mostly do nothing because those guns will be next to useless. People may have them to look at them, but they'd have to keep them hidden. You couldn't use them for anything for fear of getting busted. They would be contraband. The government would know pretty much who still had them, but they would let most of it go. However, if they ever had a reason they wanted to get someone for any reason, they would have carte blanche to go after them.
    paulinsf and Havok like this.
    Attack Squadron 65 "Tigers", USS Eisenhower '80 - '83, peackeeping w/Iran, Libya, Lebanon and E. Europe

  4. Remove Advertisements
    DefensiveCarry.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #34
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion county, Ohio
    Posts
    32,683
    Germany 1918-1938 gives a great model for how gun control work. Someone recommended "Gun Control in the Third Reich" to me recently. It is a fascinating, insightful read so far.
    "Stop being dangerous, and you become edible." William Aprill

    "Slaves, enjoy your freedom." Chuck Klosterman

  6. #35
    VIP Member Array CG11's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    NorthWestern Arizona
    Posts
    5,322
    Regardless of how they feel personally, military and law enforcement will be caught in the middle. They will feel the squeeze from both sides, and how they choose to act will generally be based on what they think is their most honorable, defendable, and logical position at the time. Yes, I believe that oath does matter.
    Be careful of people who brag about who they are - a lion will never have to tell you who he's a lion.

  7. #36
    VIP Member Array Havok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,600
    Quote Originally Posted by 1942bull View Post
    True. However, the trials of getting to top command positions in the Military embed a deep respect for the Constitution and law. It is an anomoly that we have a retired general as Sec.Def today. But even if we did not, I stand by my opinion that career military people actually understand what it means to “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”. Lower ranking members of the military do too. I know. I haveeen there.
    Some do. Politics play a big role in the career of senior officers. Guys like David Petreus and Bill Mcraven are examples of flag officers that I don’t think do a good job “protecting and defending the constitution”. Meanwhile, Brian Loseys career was halted by a politician with an axe to grind.
    OldChap likes this.
    We get the government we deserve.

  8. #37
    Distinguished Member Array 19Kvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,253
    Quote Originally Posted by CavemanBob View Post
    IMHO, local actions are more likely than at the Federal level. Take, for instance, Colorado which did experience the "Blue Wave", a Democrat House, Senate and Governor. In all likelihood, we will get more gun control in the next session, a "red-flag" law and perhaps an "assault-weapon" ban. Some counties will probably ignore most of the anti-gun laws which come into effect, much as they currently ignore the hi-cap magazine ban. Other cities and counties such as Denver proper, will probably enforce any new anti-gun laws with glee. Local actions are far less likely to generate a massive push-back so will be generally accepted much as the "assault-rifle" ban in Boulder has been. Anyway, that's my best guess...
    And most of Colorado law enforcement will ignore whatever laws they pass just like they ignore the 2013 laws.

    I'm hoping that the democrats will not forget John Morris' example and then take a pass on gun control.

  9. #38
    Member Array Merovius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    54
    I'm not terribly optimistic that people will stand up and defy orders when faced with the choice. History does not back that position up. It is far too easy to be caught up in what later turns out to be an act of evil than most people are willing to admit. Most won't defy orders without some critical mass of group support on their side. If we are supremely fortunate, that measure of support will be there, but I won't hold my breath waiting for it to materialize. As noted above, history is not on the side of heroic resistance. I'll leave this as an example to ponder.
    https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/647492.Ordinary_Men
    AnthonyC likes this.
    In light and darkness alike,
    I am fearfully and wonderfully made.

  10. #39
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion county, Ohio
    Posts
    32,683
    The weeding out process of who will and who will not obey difficult orders begins with the initial interview, and is carried out through the entire career development process.
    It's not that tough. The Nazis, for example figured it out early and carried it all the way through to the end. One is either politically reliable, or is not. One either drives the truck, or rides in the back with the other unreliables.

    There are plenty of door kickers in the may issue states to carry out the red-flag, no knock agenda. No reason to believe they aren't in plentiful enough supply to carry out agendas elsewhere.
    PPS1980 and Merovius like this.
    "Stop being dangerous, and you become edible." William Aprill

    "Slaves, enjoy your freedom." Chuck Klosterman

  11. #40
    Senior Member Array ugh762x39's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    909
    IDK. Maybe there’ll be a sudden epidemic of Blue Flu across the Nation?🤒
    OldChap, The Old Anglo and baren like this.
    "If you can do it, you damn well better be able to look at it!".....Matt Helm

  12. #41
    Ex Member Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    19,639
    Well if a possible nuke strike by our own politicians was imminent, there'd be no need to know whether leo's or mils would follow orders to confiscate. Certainly not without hazmat suits. A nuke is not a precision strike, they'll never use one on the populace as collateral damage would be unacceptable to those who survived. Hell, we can't even bomb our foreign enemies with nukes mainly due to the collateral damage which is just too non PC for even the politicians to accept [ and which has been getting mils killed for decades.

    The mils and leo's would be subjected to the same radiation/fall out and just as dead as those the gov wanted to disarm. Never going to happen, it's an absurd statement by an even more absurd politician.
    wmhawth and OldChap like this.

  13. #42
    Member Array retired badge 1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Location
    Pueblo, Colorado
    Posts
    441
    There is no way to tell in advance how LEO's and military personnel might respond. I suspect that a significant percentage would refuse to comply with orders to disarm, conduct sweeping search & seizure operations, detain otherwise law-abiding citizens, etc. I also suspect that those positions would be quickly refilled by wannabees who would do anything to get a badge and authority.

    The big question IMO is how will the gun-owning public respond. Approx. 350 million firearms now in the hands of 110-120 million citizens. If only 1% refuse to comply that would amount to some 1.1 to 1.2 million people, and I doubt that it would be possible to arrest, detain, try, imprison, or otherwise deal with that many criminal cases.

    Then we might consider our Canadian neighbors' experience with C-96, a law requiring owner licensing, registration of all firearms, strict controls on ammunition, strict storage requirements, etc. For more than 10 years the Canadian government refused to divulge the costs or efficacy of this measure; then when forced to do so it was learned that more than 20 times as much had been spent as was promised, and after more than 10 years they could report less than 15% compliance. Groups formed such as LUFA (Law-abiding Unregistered Firearms Association), travelling to major cities to hold rallies, openly displaying their unregistered firearms, with the slogan "Come and go to prison with me". In many cities Canadians waited until the last day they could legally register, then converged en mass on local offices, taking up every parking space for miles around before the clerks and staff arrived for work, standing in line for hours while exchanging sworn statements with each other attesting to the fact that they had tried to comply with the law but the government could not accommodate them. The government responded with a plan for mail-in registrations, and LUFA members completed the 3-part form, kept their copies, purchased postal money orders for the fees (keeping receipts), then destroyed all the paperwork other than their own copies (it was reported that government registries were more than 5 years behind in processing registrations into the system, so it was impossible to determine who had complied and who had not).

    We have seen similar results in states that have adopted so-called assault weapons bans, hi-cap mag bans, etc. I know of none that can honestly report 15% compliance after several years.

    I believe that the most effective response would be millions of gun owners simply standing up and declaring "I WILL NOT COMPLY. COME AND ARREST ME". Anyone actually arrested should plead not guilty, refuse to post bail, refuse to give a promise to appear in court. Within a few weeks time it would become apparent that there simply are not enough cops to do the arresting, nor enough jail space to house the new "criminals", nor enough courtrooms or judges to process the cases to trial, much less any empty prison cells to incarcerate those actually convicted.

    I also believe that about the same percentage of Americans who actually participated in the Revolutionary War (estimated at 2% of the population) would begin resistance operations, perhaps including armed assaults on government officials, etc. NOTE THAT I DO NOT ADVOCATE SUCH A RESPONSE, I AM MERELY PROGNOSTICATING.

    Massive peaceful civil disobedience, with the possibility of active measures by a few, would have a devastating effect on the economy, and demonstrate the futility of attempting to disarm the American public.

  14. #43
    VIP Member Array OldChap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5,533
    @retired badge 1 Excellent post sir. My experience with the officers in my department hinted to me that a lot of their response would fall into whether or not they felt it was a heavy handed way to control law-abiding citizens. The vast majority have a great respect for the law and the Constitution and simply wouldn't tolerate orders to go door to door - even if nobody resisted.

    After all, does anyone think an officer, who lived in a neighborhood, would go door to door in their neighborhood confiscating private property without due process and expect their home and family to continue to live there? I sure wouldn't. That is what many here seem to not realize. Maybe they believe police officers are all bused in every day to work from far away.

    Police have spent a great deal of time trying to gain the respect of the communities they serve. Throwing all that away would make policing what? Easier? Hardly. Cooperation would probably evaporate from a significant portion of law abiding citizens who would otherwise support the police.

    One prediction is, I fear, dead on. If a significant portion of police get involved with dealing with otherwise law-abiding citizens and their guns, the CRIMINALS ARE GOING TO HAVE A FIELD DAY. I don't know of any major police departments in Texas who are anywhere near fully staffed. Seems no one wants to be a cop any more. Less police presence = more crime. Guaranteed.

    And one issue you forgot to mention is that if we start imprisoning a million or two more people, the already busted state and federal budgets are going to hemorrhage to such an extent that every state and municipality will go bankrupt. More people in jail = more money to support them = more taxes. Isn't that what finally broke King George's plan up?

    And all that might take place prior to a 1776 response. I pray some fools wake up before anyone strikes that match.
    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits."

  15. #44
    VIP Member Array Havok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    US
    Posts
    6,600
    Quote Originally Posted by AzQkr View Post
    Well if a possible nuke strike by our own politicians was imminent, there'd be no need to know whether leo's or mils would follow orders to confiscate. Certainly not without hazmat suits. A nuke is not a precision strike, they'll never use one on the populace as collateral damage would be unacceptable to those who survived. Hell, we can't even bomb our foreign enemies with nukes mainly due to the collateral damage which is just too non PC for even the politicians to accept [ and which has been getting mils killed for decades.

    The mils and leo's would be subjected to the same radiation/fall out and just as dead as those the gov wanted to disarm. Never going to happen, it's an absurd statement by an even more absurd politician.
    Absurd or not, those are his feelings about gun owners.
    ugh762x39 likes this.
    We get the government we deserve.

  16. #45
    Ex Member Array AzQkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    In the Superstitions
    Posts
    19,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Havok View Post
    Absurd or not, those are his feelings about gun owners.
    I find people who make absurd statements of future events that will never happen to be something to ignore, not discuss. It becomes an exercise in futility and a waste of bandwidth/breath
    wmhawth likes this.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

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