Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

While highly unlikely this would happen its not that difficult for it to happen.
All it would take I'd the administration to declare a national emergency about anything. Could be cyber security or declaring the NRA a terrorist originization then suspend posse comitatus.
Does anyone else think its odd that all these federal agencies are purchasing ammo by the hundreds of thousands?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Here's my take on the situation: I think the administration could pull a small operation (like waco) off by telling the military that it is an encampment of terrorists or such. If it happened on larger scale like a small city, many military leaders would realize what's going on and either refuse or dessert.
The challenge in creating a resistant force would be in creating an assembly point or area to collect the like minded people together secretly. Actual cells would naturally be created but collecting the leaders in a common objective would be a needed goal.

arab1302 wrote: My last comment is this. I don't recall which member said it, but there was a comment about mid grade officers not getting the oath. There are thousands more mid grade officers in the military as a whole and in any given Service than you would ever be able to meet. I realize I am being a little bit sensitive, but stupidity happens at all ranks. Single one out and you will invariably have the reader (or listener) discount your argument because they think you have a problem with people who outrank you. This is a personal observation so please feel free to flame me for it. Just don't vote for gun control.

That was me. Not trying to flame you, just explaining: I singled out mid-grade officers because the specific examples that I heard first hand all happened to come from O3s and O4s of various services. It has nothing to do with them outranking me, because they don't. I'm well aware that people like that exist at all ranks, and that they don't represent everyone. Just pointing out that they exist, because I've heard a lot of people make statements that "the military" will take one side or the other. I believe that if a split comes, the military will fracture along with the rest of society. There is a whole spectrum of political opinions among military members, as should be expected. And don't worry, I would never support gun control. I place great value on individual liberty.

wpoppert wrote:

arab1302 wrote: My last comment is this. I don't recall which member said it, but there was a comment about mid grade officers not getting the oath. There are thousands more mid grade officers in the military as a whole and in any given Service than you would ever be able to meet. I realize I am being a little bit sensitive, but stupidity happens at all ranks. Single one out and you will invariably have the reader (or listener) discount your argument because they think you have a problem with people who outrank you. This is a personal observation so please feel free to flame me for it. Just don't vote for gun control.

That was me. Not trying to flame you, just explaining: I singled out mid-grade officers because the specific examples that I heard first hand all happened to come from O3s and O4s of various services. It has nothing to do with them outranking me, because they don't. I'm well aware that people like that exist at all ranks, and that they don't represent everyone. Just pointing out that they exist, because I've heard a lot of people make statements that "the military" will take one side or the other. I believe that if a split comes, the military will fracture along with the rest of society. There is a whole spectrum of political opinions among military members, as should be expected. And don't worry, I would never support gun control. I place great value on individual liberty.

I agree 100% with both gentlemen!

How quickly you people forget what happened in New Orleans:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tta1qhQZWSE

SpanishInquisition wrote:How quickly you people forget what happened in New Orleans:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tta1qhQZWSE

Spectacular example of where we are headed. Thanks for that reminder.

I think some here have a really romanticized and/or very out of date view of the military.

Truth be told I see no problem with todays Army firing on civilians, hell, many would probably have a hard on while they're at it.

I was a lower enlisted dude 11 years ago (time flies!), if you think the modern American army (read: gangbangers, sex offenders, alkies, illiterates, psychopaths, illegal immigrants, meth-heads, pedophiles, etc.) even know what the Constitution is, you are sorely mistaken.

Plus its rather uh, "diverse" so shooting a few racist gun nut white devils wouldn't be much of a crisis of conscience if you catch my drift.

I had a good view of how things worked on the bottom; it was terrifying and I was happy to leave.

Kreutz wrote:I think some here have a really romanticized and/or very out of date view of the military.

Truth be told I see no problem with todays Army firing on civilians, hell, many would probably have a hard on while they're at it.

I was a lower enlisted dude 11 years ago (time flies!), if you think the modern American army (read: gangbangers, sex offenders, alkies, illiterates, psychopaths, illegal immigrants, meth-heads, pedophiles, etc.) even know what the Constitution is, you are sorely mistaken.

Plus its rather uh, "diverse" so shooting a few racist gun nut white devils wouldn't be much of a crisis of conscience if you catch my drift.

I had a good view of how things worked on the bottom; it was terrifying and I was happy to leave.

And we are glad you left. You are off the edge of the map.

I just heard Dennis Kucinich say on "Hannity"

"People militarize themselves when they do not trust the government when it gets bigger. What does our government do? It grows bigger, and causes even MORE people to militarize themselves!"

From a confessed LIBERAL comes the friggin' TRUTH! HOLY JEBUS!

And there it is folks. When John Q Public is arming themselves for a conflict like the Powder Alarm right before Gates confiscated the colonists stores... Someone better let cooler heads prevail.

arab1302 wrote:And we are glad you left. You are off the edge of the map.

Guess I struck a nerve, which one of them are you then?

And who is "we"?

I stand by my post. There is ample evidence of it happening before here and it can happen again. US soldiers have killed US civilians here.

The interview with the man that started this discussion: http://youtu.be/kzT6X3_Bg9o

Machias wrote:

Doyle wrote:

It is BS. If anyone believes this, they do not understand the military.

Because we swear an oath to the US Constitution, we are not bound by unlawful orders. Trust me the US Military, at least a large part, would not turn on the American public. Won't happen.

Yup! Look how well that thought worked for the Germany Army during WWII.

?????

Kreutz wrote:

arab1302 wrote:And we are glad you left. You are off the edge of the map.

Guess I struck a nerve, which one of them are you then?

And who is "we"?

I stand by my post. There is ample evidence of it happening before here and it can happen again. US soldiers have killed US civilians here.

Enlighten us

Kreutz wrote:I think some here have a really romanticized and/or very out of date view of the military.

Truth be told I see no problem with todays Army firing on civilians, hell, many would probably have a hard on while they're at it.

I was a lower enlisted dude 11 years ago (time flies!), if you think the modern American army (read: gangbangers, sex offenders, alkies, illiterates, psychopaths, illegal immigrants, meth-heads, pedophiles, etc.) even know what the Constitution is, you are sorely mistaken.

Plus its rather uh, "diverse" so shooting a few racist gun nut white devils wouldn't be much of a crisis of conscience if you catch my drift.

I had a good view of how things worked on the bottom; it was terrifying and I was happy to leave.

I have worked on a military installation since 1981, from the bottom pay grades to the top, We still have the best and brightest. I'm not the least bit worried about a good % of our troops.

Machias wrote:

Kreutz wrote:I think some here have a really romanticized and/or very out of date view of the military.

Truth be told I see no problem with todays Army firing on civilians, hell, many would probably have a hard on while they're at it.

I was a lower enlisted dude 11 years ago (time flies!), if you think the modern American army (read: gangbangers, sex offenders, alkies, illiterates, psychopaths, illegal immigrants, meth-heads, pedophiles, etc.) even know what the Constitution is, you are sorely mistaken.

Plus its rather uh, "diverse" so shooting a few racist gun nut white devils wouldn't be much of a crisis of conscience if you catch my drift.

I had a good view of how things worked on the bottom; it was terrifying and I was happy to leave.

I have worked on a military installation since 1981, from the bottom pay grades to the top, We still have the best and brightest. I'm not the least bit worried about a good % of our troops.

I will grant Kreutz does have a valid point or two, I served from 1982 to 2010. I saw my fair share of alcoholics, drug use (marijuana in the early years, ecstasy, cocaine and prescription drug abuse toward the end) a lot of which usually got weeded out on a regular basis. Since it is a slice of America, there are some who are sex offenders, some might be psychopaths, I never knowingly met an illegal immigrant, all foreigners I served with were of the proudly legal variety. Some were like Kreutz, there specifically for the betterment of themselves. I have read plenty of his posts and he was proud beneficiary of the GI Bill. He served his time, it was part of the benefits package he contracted for and as such is perfectly entitled to use it. The fact that the Army wasn't for him is perfectly fine by me too. I am sure his former leaders didn't cry when he left. I have the impression that he was probably a Soldier who questioned everything and was constantly unhappy, a fun sponge ( sucks the fun out of everything), and would complain if somebody threw cold water on him at a July parade rehearsal, rather than enjoy it.

Machias, thanks for your service. I would be much closer to agreeing with you. There might be a few that would be willing to pull the trigger on Americans. Some may doubt, but I have faith that most servicemen will do the right thing.

Machias wrote:Enlighten us

Off the top of my head, in chronological order, Shays Rebellion, draft riots, the Bonus Army, kent state, the CIA letting anthrax into the NYC subway; like I said there is a precedent.

As for Grumpy, of course I was there for the betterment of myself, why else would anyone be there? I remember the first day of basic the platoons were all arranged into a square and everyone had to say why they were there, the vast bulk were there for college dough/paycheck, quite a few said it was this or jail, a few wanted to travel, and some needed food and a bed. My reason was that I really had nothing better to do, I didn't want to go to college right out of high school nor did I want to work a conventional job.

As for "fun sponge", the fun was nowhere to be found, ergo, none could be sucked.

Truth be told I was invisible the entire time, the attitude you describe would have attracted attention, which was the last thing I wanted. I was nicknamed "ninja" for my invisibility....most useful when details or field duty came up.

My tour was further enhanced by a clinic rotation (i was a medic) which was supposed to be for a month but they kept me for 7 or 8 since I was able to use a computer (no small feat in 2000), which ate up a huge % of my two year term in an air conditioned cushy office and caused alot of people in my platoon to not know who I was...also useful for when details or field duty came up.

I think I got picked for field duty once besides a Ft Irwin 45 day rotation everyone had to go on and I slept through since our vehicles kept breaking down so we just sat around alot and raced these weird giant beetles for money.

I remember that one field thing because an APC crashed in a ditch and I actually had to treat injuries, something I only did twice, the second time a tanker somehow cut his knee open breaking track at Ft Irwin.

It was an uneventful 2 years which is how I wanted it to be. I left with an honorable discharge, 19k in my pocket, and the GI bill, not too bad.

I certainly want to believe tyhe US military would refuse unlawful orders and decline to fire on US citizens. I think many and perhaps most of them would; IF they can figure out what an unlawful order is. It may not always be completely clear-cut to the average soldier. What was that place where Lt. Calley ordered all those civilians killed in Viet Nam? Mi Lai?

Let's face it: When the average grunt looks his superior in the face and refuses an order, he's really putting his own ass on the line. He/she might very well end up in prison or even shot. Can we really expect all of them to reject the legal position represented by the orders that come down from our law-professor-POTUS and act on his independent legal assessment? THE DIRECTOR OF THE FREAKIN' FBI JUST SAID "HE'D HAVE TO CHECK TO SEE" IF THE POTUS COULD SUMMARILY EXECUTE A US CITIZEN ON US SOIL, FOR GOD'S SAKE! How can we expect the average grunt to process and cope with such a conundrum?

The other problem, as I see it, is that it doesn't take many as a percent of the armed forces to do horrific things on the orders of a superior. Most of the atrocities committed during the holocaust were done by a very small group called the "Einsatsgruppen". If the Commander-in-Chief is really vetting his top command to exclude people who would not give orders to fire on US citizens, how much trouble would it be for some or all of those commanders to assemble a small special hand-picked group who would not refuse such orders to be Obama's Einsatsgruppen?

I know they weren't armed forces, but ATF/FBI people did some pretty scary stuff to people who had guns they didn't approve of at Waco and Ruby Ridge with the whole damned country watching it in real time. Did ANYBODY stand up and cry foul? If they did, nobody listened. And don't forget the Gestapo tactics in the Elian Gonzales case; a swat team with an armoured vehicle to enforce what amounted to a child custody order. I guess these days you'd also have the same DHS that's bought all those hundreds of millions of rounds of ammo and armored vehicles in the middle of it on top of the ATF and FBI. Which presents another question: How would that same military react if it is mobilized to a confrontation where ATF/FBI/DHS (or one of those "einsatsgruppen" I posited) has ALREADY started a shooting confrontation?

So given the current environment, even though I too believe most - indeed, almost all - of the armed forces are good people, I think there are valid grounds for great concern.

dorminWS wrote: So given the current environment, even though I too believe most - indeed, almost all - of the armed forces are good people, I think there are valid grounds for great concern.

+1

Kreutz wrote:

Machias wrote:Enlighten us

like I said there is a precedent.