National Guard Reaction? - Page 4

National Guard Reaction?

This is a discussion on National Guard Reaction? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; For those that are not aware Virginia happens to be in the Fourth Circuit. That is the same Fourth Circuit that a couple years ago ...

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 109
Like Tree502Likes

Thread: National Guard Reaction?

  1. #46
    VIP Member Array mcp1810's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,714
    For those that are not aware Virginia happens to be in the Fourth Circuit. That is the same Fourth Circuit that a couple years ago en banc upheld Maryland's ban on " military style" rifles. The Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal. That was post Heller and post McDonald so arguing based on either of those is a non starter.

    From the Virginia Constitution,

    Virginia Constitution of 1971 Art. I, ß 13. Militia;  standing armies;  military subordinate to civil power

    That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed;  that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided as dangerous to liberty;  and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
    And,
    Virginia Constitution of 1971 Art. V, ß 7. Executive and administrative powers

    The Governor shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.

    The Governor shall be commander-in-chief of the armed forces of the Commonwealth and shall have power to embody such forces to repel invasion, suppress insurrection, and enforce the execution of the laws.
    MMinSC, OldChap, CWOUSCG and 2 others like this.
    Infowars- Proving David Hannum right on a daily basis

  2. #47
    VIP Member Array jmf552's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    6,931
    Quote Originally Posted by maxwell97 View Post
    "...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."

    So, if due process is followed, the state may deprive a person of life, liberty, and/or property. Is a Red Flag ruling the outcome of due process? I'd say no; but I couldn't blame LEO's for thinking that it is, as there is indeed a process and it's ordered by a court.

    Expecting police to happily go door-to-door for guns, because they haven't come to the "right" conclusions about every law we find problematic, is a bit silly IMHO.
    I agree. And that was my original point. They are not going to refuse to enforce unconstitutional laws. If they won't refuse for something as obviously unconstitutional as red flag, they won't refuse for anything. However I do blame them for thinking red flag may be OK because a court says so and for not coming to the right conclusions.

    The Constitution and the BOR are not documents for lawyers and judges. They are documents for the people, and they speak plainly. The rights they enumerate are not granted by the Constitution. They are inalienable, pre-existing rights, not rights courts can take away, only rights they can artificially restrict through coercion. So any cop who reads, "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" doesn't need to be a lawyer or a judge to understand clearly that, 1) That is an inalienable right, and 2) That the government (including the police) should not infringe on it. If a cop cannot do that, I do hold that against him. If I can understand it, he can too.

    The same is true for the other amendments violated by red flag, including due process. Just because a court has ruled something is OK, doesn't mean it is OK. There have been plenty of examples of that. People need to read the founding documents, understand the meaning of the words as they were intended and apply common sense. Lawyers and judges have let us down in that respect for many years.

    So I get why the police may see violating the Constitution as their job. But that is also why I don't believe they will provide any protection for us from gun control laws whatsoever, not matter what claims they make to the media. As soon as I start to see some examples of real resistance by LE, I may change my mind.
    Attack Squadron 65 "Tigers", USS Eisenhower '80 - '83, peackeeping w/Iran, Libya, Lebanon and E. Europe

  3. #48
    VIP Member Array maxwell97's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    9,959
    "The mass of men serve the State thus, not as men mainly, but as machines, with their bodies. They are the standing army, and the militia, jailers, constables, posse comitatus, &c. In most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgment or of the moral sense; but they put themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones; and wooden men can perhaps be manufactured that will serve the purpose as well... Others, as most legislators, politicians, lawyers, ministers, and office-holders, serve the State chiefly with their heads; and, as they rarely make any moral distinctions, they are as likely to serve the devil, without intending it, as God. A very few, as heroes, patriots, martyrs, reformers in the great sense, and men, serve the State with their consciences also, and so necessarily resist it for the most part; and they are commonly treated by it as enemies." - Henry David Thoreau

    Now, I don't share this dim view of law enforcement, but there's a true principle expressed here - people who serve the state serve the state. They don't make policies or laws, they don't interpret them, they enforce them. And necessarily every LEO will enforce laws that somebody thinks are wrong, and likely some that he thinks are wrong, but he doesn't have authority to make that decision.

    So it doesn't mean much to point out that law enforcement enforces current gun laws - of course they do, like they enforce all bad laws. Anyone who can't put aside his personal opinions to some degree is not fit for that job. The important question is, at what point will it become too much for them? There are certainly some who would do whatever they're told, but I believe the majority would refuse to do substantial harm to their fellow citizens, including gun confiscation beyond individual court orders.

    I'll also point out that taking guns away from people is a routine part of police work. There's no explicit exception in the 2A for, say, disarming a robber at gunpoint, but it's something they do, isn't it? (My point being that the meaning of "shall not be infringed" is not nearly as clear as some seem to think.)
    M1911A1, MMinSC, Nix and 2 others like this.
    "Lots of ways to help people. Sometimes heal patients; sometimes shoot dangerous people. Either way helps."
    - Dr. Mordin Solus

  4. Remove Advertisements
    DefensiveCarry.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #49
    VIP Member Array SouthernBoyVA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    2,931
    Quote Originally Posted by OldChap View Post
    @jmf552 ..... I'm glad to hear about your resolve. You might not realize that ethics for a soldier and a police officer are very similar. As a sworn officer, you are legally responsible for orders you choose not to obey as well as orders you choose to obey. We expect officers to always understand the difference between lawful and unlawful orders. That is precisely why I am optimistic about how police will respond to unlawful orders.

    There will always be some who will break the law, but I pray most will understand what they are being asked to do..Time will tell how the red flag laws hold up. I expect at some point they will be found to be unlawful and abolished. Those who have enforced those unconstitutional "laws" will probably have to stand before the bar of justice. The "I was ordered" defense will fail.

    Supporting my point is not important. I don't have access to the data anymore. I do believe in the good officers across this country. I believe they will do the right thing. There is no proof beyond what a few have done. When such laws become widespread, then we will know. They know that the "I was only following orders" defense won't keep them out of prison - or worse.

    That is the only thing that is important.

    EDIT I forgot to add. This article wasn't so much about everyone in VA getting "red flagged" as it was about the Governor sending the National Guard door to door to confiscate guns. Either way though, the question is about denying due process and whether or not the "I was just following orders" defense will work.
    In Virginia, all police officers must swear an oath to both the federal Constitution and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia. In so doing, any law that they obey that countermands those two documents would be a violation to their oath and, in fact, an illegal act.

    While we have seen this take place time and time again, it IS illegal, plain and simple.
    MMinSC, airslot, OldChap and 2 others like this.
    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?

    America First!

  6. #50
    Senior Member Array beebee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    FarLeft NY
    Posts
    937
    I dunno.. I see many members here expecting LEO and the military to "do the right thing" and disobey orders from their superiors..
    Despite what the constitution says, and despite whats right, in my opinion fewer than 10% will side with the constitution, and 90% will side with tyranny, They will kick down doors if need be, in full tactical outfit , hold and rough up law abiding citizens with guns to their faces, with small children and women screaming in terror , ransack homes without apology, and if anyone dares to resist strenuously, will be murdered in front of their families without hesitation.

    We have seen it time and time again. The media will provide all necessary smoke screens , and those that fall will be branded terrorists, cult members, illegal gun runners, racists, radicals, gang members, killers, criminals etc etc.. The populace at large will believe it as always.. People like the members here on this forum will know better, but the numbers just aren't there. The sheeple will see it as a GOOD thing, order will be restored, and now we are "safe".
    In my opinion slavery to the state is in the future of the US, because thats what so many people are demanding.
    Another word for "democracy" is mob rule.
    Thats what is happening in Virginia right now, and has already happened in Ca, NY, Co. Md.NJ.Ct.Mass. and many more...

    The cities call the shots , and they are demanding socialism, safety, security, welfare, "free stuff", and will gladly and with a smile and a victory shout will exchange it for their freedom and constitutional rights.
    The demographics turn against us a little more each day.
    I PRAY that I am wrong, and that sanity prevails, and that one day you good people right here can tell me what an idiot I was for believing such drivel, that people would gladly exchange freedom for tyranny.
    However, as of right now, i sense the tide turning against us... bob
    MMinSC, airslot, Nix and 8 others like this.

  7. #51
    VIP Member Array Smitty901's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    4,504
    Virginia you get what you vote for . Good luck, Why not sell your guns now while you can discount them 50 cents on the dollar. Beats just giving the to your state government. Virginia you got what you voted for. Enjoy.
    OldChap likes this.
    Yes Taurus really does suck. But in fairness they sure turned it around fast on warranty repair. Time will tell

  8. #52
    VIP Member Array Havok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    US
    Posts
    7,131
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoyVA View Post
    In Virginia, all police officers must swear an oath to both the federal Constitution and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia. In so doing, any law that they obey that countermands those two documents would be a violation to their oath and, in fact, an illegal act.

    While we have seen this take place time and time again, it IS illegal, plain and simple.
    But who is going to hold them accountable for it?
    OldChap and Mjolnir like this.
    We get the government we deserve.

  9. #53
    VIP Member Array SouthernBoyVA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    2,931
    Quote Originally Posted by Havok View Post
    During the Obama administration, the US military did drop bombs on US citizens. You can say he was a terrorist, and justify it however you want, but it was still a US citizen. If thatís ok, where is the line drawn?
    That was absolutely fine with me. Anyone who goes over to the other side, think Americans of German decent who fought for Germany in WWII, deserves to be killed as quickly and efficiently as possible. They have become the enemy and therefore have lost any rights and privileges of being an American.
    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?

    America First!

  10. #54
    VIP Member Array Havok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    US
    Posts
    7,131
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernBoyVA View Post
    That was absolutely fine with me. Anyone who goes over to the other side, think Americans of German decent who fought for Germany in WWII, deserve to be killed as quickly and efficiently as possible. They have become the enemy and therefore have lost any rights and privileges of being an American.
    Would you be ok with the San Francisco PD using bombs to kill people who meet their definition of terrorist? Slippery slope here...

    For clarification, Iím not saying the PDís definition, but then carrying out the actions for who the city wants to define as a terrorist.

    You say they went over to the other side. And that may be so. Youíre trusting the same government ran by a legislator who threatened to nuke gun owners to use judgement on that. If that person were not actually part of a terrorist organization, who would ever know?
    OldChap and Mjolnir like this.
    We get the government we deserve.

  11. #55
    VIP Member Array SouthernBoyVA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    2,931
    Quote Originally Posted by Havok View Post
    But who is going to hold them accountable for it?
    In the extreme it is We The People. But as others have posted, I rather doubt that will come to pass. What I would like to see is tens of thousands upon tens of thousands of well armed people banding together and sending the message of, "Not today, Not tomorrow, Not ever" to Richmond.
    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?

    America First!

  12. #56
    VIP Member Array SouthernBoyVA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    2,931
    Quote Originally Posted by Havok View Post
    Would you be ok with the San Francisco PD using bombs to kill people who meet their definition of terrorist? Slippery slope here...

    For clarification, Iím not saying the PDís definition, but then carrying out the actions for who the city wants to define as a terrorist.

    You say they went over to the other side. And that may be so. Youíre trusting the same government ran by a legislator who threatened to nuke gun owners to use judgement on that. If that person were not actually part of a terrorist organization, who would ever know?
    You are severely stretching what I wrote. The Americans who were targeted in the last administration were in a foreign land and who had taken the conscious decision to carry out terrorist operations against Americans and other western peoples. Would I be in favor of bombing a section of a city in which a few terrorists, or a group of them, carried out an action against the citizens, think the Boston bombing? No, of course not. But I would favor killing them. You don't capture and try enemy combatants in a court of law. You kill them. Can you imagine trying to capture Jap soldiers on Iwo Jima and take them to court? Of course not. The Marines did their damnedest to kill every one of those b*****ds and they did a heck of a good job of this. We should take the same approach to terrorists who come over here to kill Americans. They are the enemy and supposedly, we are at war with terrorists. And war means killing people and breaking their things.
    Last edited by SouthernBoyVA; December 22nd, 2019 at 09:41 AM.
    Rockymonster and OldChap like this.
    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?

    America First!

  13. #57
    VIP Member Array maxwell97's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    9,959
    Quote Originally Posted by Havok View Post
    Would you be ok with the San Francisco PD using bombs to kill people who meet their definition of terrorist? Slippery slope here...

    For clarification, Iím not saying the PDís definition, but then carrying out the actions for who the city wants to define as a terrorist.

    You say they went over to the other side. And that may be so. Youíre trusting the same government ran by a legislator who threatened to nuke gun owners to use judgement on that. If that person were not actually part of a terrorist organization, who would ever know?
    If you're talking about Al-Awlaki, he made his allegiances pretty clear, on the web for all to see.
    OldChap likes this.
    "Lots of ways to help people. Sometimes heal patients; sometimes shoot dangerous people. Either way helps."
    - Dr. Mordin Solus

  14. #58
    VIP Member Array OldChap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,042
    Quote Originally Posted by Mjolnir View Post
    Why can you not blame them?

    Can they not read?

    Did they not take Civics?

    Can they not research things for themselves?

    Are they dogs (a creature that will gladly do as its commanded)?

    NO ONE is exempt from [personal responsibility from ]violating the Constitution & Bill of Rights.
    The most important lesson WE the people missed: Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits."

    "What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms." - Thomas Jefferson

  15. #59
    VIP Member Array OldChap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    6,042
    Quote Originally Posted by beebee View Post
    I dunno.. I see many members here expecting LEO and the military to "do the right thing" and disobey orders from their superiors..
    Despite what the constitution says, and despite whats right, in my opinion fewer than 10% will side with the constitution, and 90% will side with tyranny, They will kick down doors if need be, in full tactical outfit , hold and rough up law abiding citizens with guns to their faces, with small children and women screaming in terror , ransack homes without apology, and if anyone dares to resist strenuously, will be murdered in front of their families without hesitation......
    A couple of points. First, this is exactly my point. How can anyone actually believe this will/does happen to their precious families and still live in that country? My answer? They should move away - immediately. OR my second point would violate forum rules, but most of us know how to stop such atrocities. There are a great many folks who have the knowledge, skills, training, and access to things that would make fighting the Taliban look like a picnic.

    And all this talk, but no one has explained the extraordinary things taking place in VA at the COUNTY LEVEL. Declaring 2nd Amendment sanctuary status, deputizing citizens, organizing militias. If everyone believes any response will be immediately overwhelmed by force of arms (as many here seem to claim), why all this? You'll have to explain it as something other than armed resistance on a state-wide scale.

    Most of you know that the Chief Law Enforcement Officer in a county (in almost all states) is not a police chief, but an elected County Sheriff. Are we not seeing a response by Chief LEO's in what now seems to be a huge majority of counties in VA? If the conclusion is so foregone, how do you explain it?

    I need to make one other slightly pertinent point. Those of you who say the only role of police and military is to obey orders ala robots, have missed something in your education. The UCMJ and law enforcement handbooks, not to mention state and federal law, do not state that every order must be obeyed regardless, it states that every LAWFUL (not Constitutional) order must be obeyed.

    The plan was to have flag officers who were moral (lawful) people issue moral (lawful) orders to those subordinate to them. It was assumed that moral leaders would not issue immoral, unlawful orders and thus violate the supreme law of the land, the Constitution. History has shown us what happens when unlawful orders are followed (or lawful orders are misconstrued or misunderstood in execution resulting in unlawful conduct). People are charged, tried, and go to prison. Some of you maybe missed my comment about such things, so I will state it again:

    If you are a soldier or LEO, you are held responsible for every order you must obey and held equally responsible for every order you are duty-bound not to obey. YOU are expected to understand what orders are lawful and what orders are unlawful - you...and no one will take the fall in your place. Fail at either point and you can land in prison - or at least you should. If you don't believe me, check it out for yourself.
    Rock and Glock likes this.
    "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits."

    "What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms." - Thomas Jefferson

  16. #60
    Senior Member Array dp1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    594
    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty901 View Post
    Virginia you get what you vote for . Good luck, Why not sell your guns now while you can discount them 50 cents on the dollar. Beats just giving the to your state government. Virginia you got what you voted for. Enjoy.
    What a load. There were many, many people who voted against this, but unfortunately they were outnumbered & out-voted by big cities bought and paid for by Bloomberg.

    Have you seen what the people of VA are doing, the people you're saying should sell their guns? Thank God they're not taking your advice
    OldChap, graydude, LAK and 1 others like this.

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 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
  •