What was his reply to that?



He would definitely be tasked with taking guns from fellow vets if a confiscation order came up.



One thing about MOUT training, it sure as hell taught me how to make my house difficult to raid safely.



 

OK, here is a question for the guy who are/were in the military, esp the enlisted ones.



You were trained to follow orders right.  Did the drill sergeant ever explicitly say: except when ordered to perform door to door confiscations on US citizens in the United States?




Also, withstanding the people here, do most 18-22 year olds think about such an issue? I fear that they are brain washed to do what they are told and dammit, they will do it.






 

Those in the .mil who know enough about the 2nd amendment to stand up for it will all be on the outside of the .gov looking in if that order ever came. Now all you've got are the "guns are bad" crowd in the .mil trying to enforce something they have no heart for. Good f'ing luck!

Yeah, in boot camp we were given an extensive list of every single possible illegal order

Says another civilian

Enlist and find out

Dammit, the whole point of me phrasing my question that way was to avoid exactly the type of response I got from you.  I have succeeded in accomplishing what I wanted to not accomplish! Either I can't write san inflection or you can't read san inflection.




 
 

I was simply posting to impart how this young man sees his duty to obey orders.  

This is not an "OMG! They are coming to get our guns!!!" thread.

If they are brainwashed they will do what their Officers and NCOs tell them.

There's a few co-workers in my ANG unit that I would absolutely expect to be on the opposite side of me in a second U.S. Civil War. It freaks me out.

No matter your intentions, it is what it has (or will) become.

Be a damn shame to die in your own country "following orders".

The Milgram Experiments came to a conclusion, pretty scary. From Wiki, not the best source but accurate.


Milgram summarized the experiment in his 1974 article, "The Perils of Obedience", writing:

The legal and philosophic aspects of obedience are of enormous importance, but they say very little about how most people behave in concrete situations. I set up a simple experiment at Yale University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist. Stark authority was pitted against the subjects' [participants'] strongest moral imperatives against hurting others, and, with the subjects' [participants'] ears ringing with the screams of the victims, authority won more often than not. The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding explanation.

Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become agents in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

The irony here is that certain groups in power could make it so taking weapons is legal

This thread will turn into the usual shitstorm of military haters bashing AD personnel at every fucking turn.



Its been done 1000x times, nothing new.



On one hand we have a proud ARFCOM, proud of its military.



The other is the ARFCOM that thinks every AD troop is a JBT just salivating at the thought of doing door to door ops in suburban America.



Same bullshit different day.

I tell you what. Before that happens the government will have the public so scared of us that the millitary will have no problem kicking in your door.
Nationalized tobacco industry now??????
When are we goin to have enough folks. I see alot of smoke and spit on the pages but how many contact their reps and are willing to hit the street?


Dave C

Fat chance since it would require amending the Constitution.

Plus 1 sound the alarms!!!!





 

Oh, like a mechanic is going to be sent door to door confiscating guns.

No, he'll sit safely on base, smugly telling us he told us so.

What a crock! This site bends over backwards to support the US military. JBT's are known by their ACTIONS. They come from both the LE and the military community. But are not indicative of those communities as a whole. And much less in the military community IMO. I have seen the posts of many officers on this very site proclaiming their intention to refuse such illegal orders. For that I salute them. To any who admit they'd "just follow orders", I also salute them (but only need one finger). That doesn't make me or ANYONE else here a "military hater". Your post is FULL OF FAIL...

To those AD and retired military members who may be confused about their role in UPHOLDING the Constitution, I respectfully suggest they get themselves an education. The day they think that they or their orders are somehow above that document, will be the day this country no longer exists PERIOD.

Fat chance Obama gives a shit.

The Milgram experiment and it's variations should scare the crap out of everyone.



 

Given the size of this country, the huge number of people possessing the requisite skills, and the availability of materials, it is more likely that resistance would take the form of bombs and sniping rather than militias and door-to-door resistance.

I don't think LEOs are going to be going door to door.  They can't catch the dopers, illegals, or all of the speeders.  How many cops do you think there are?  Staffing is usually 1 cop per 1000 people.  Most agencies don't even meet those minimum standards.   By most ARFCOMERS opinion, most cops don't even know what a gun looks like.  I think you are safe from the door to door scenario.  More than likely, it will be a voluntary surrender with you getting a ticket to your favorite concert.

Its amazing how many people on this sight would like to go join that American citizen and hose down a private smoking a cigerete outside a recruiting office.  Alex Jones much?...

I'm confused on the smiley do you look forward to that?

Hahaha, no fucking shit.
 

In 1934, 1968, 1989 it was largely procedural or taxing, should gun owners have drawn a line in the sand, HELL YES, but most didn't really understand the risks and went along with the program.  In 1994 everyone knew that there was an sunset date, so it was a waiting game. But an outright bank and/or confiscation will lead to VERY BAD THINGS.

Yep, that's all that most of the Nazi's were doing, just following orders..

 Here is some videos people was asking for from you tube about gun confiscation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-taU9d26wT4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sm5PC7z79-8

Sigh!!! Cops and swat cops with NG doing police call. Look lester that soldier boy is picking up our litter!!!!!!! "FIRE when you see the whites of his trash bags!!!!!!"

http://www.oath-keepers.blogspot.com

OBEY AND DO NOT QUESTION!!!!

ZICH HEIL!! ZICH HEIL!! ZICH HEIL!!








Err wait what country are we in??

Ask bama-shooter who was confiscating firearms during Katrina. National Guard from other states, including southern states like Oklahoma.

I for one have no delusions about the military rebelling in great numbers and refusing to go door-to-door to confiscate privately owned firearms if they were told to. I also have no delusions that an instant revolution would begin and that the people would take to the streets fighting the military to keep them from taking their guns away. IF such a thing were to happen on a national level then some people would fight back independently and be killed in their living rooms. A small number of people would in certain places try and fight back like the insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan do, but they would be insignificant in number and stamped out quite quickly.

In my opinion the factors preventing door to door confiscation of firearms are much more practical:

1. It would be the instant death of the delusion of democratic government in this country. The government would be openly acknowledging that America had become a police state and that the Republic was gone forever. Whoever made the decision to do so would need to have eliminated the courts, eliminated the legislature, eliminated state government and eliminated free elections.

2. The enormity of the task. Sending people to search every home in this country for weapons would be an enormous task that would take years to complete. The entire US military is only 4 million people and there are only something like 850,000 police officers in this country (according to the US Justice Department). Conversely, there are approximately 120,000,000 single family houses in the United States. That figure does not include apartments, mobile homes (there are another 9,000,000 mobile home in the US according to the US Census Bureau), sheds, cabins, barns and vehicles. Consider the fact that the Katrina firearms confiscation only collected somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,000 firearms. Consider also that the United States has had in excess of 100,000 trained soldiers in Iraq for nearly 7 years now, in large part searching for weapons on a daily basis and they STILL have not confiscated anywhere near all of the privately owned weapons in that country.

3. The cost to deploy that force, ship the confiscated weapons, store the weapons, catalog the weapons and destroy the more than 350,000,000 firearms in this country would be astronomical.

IF privately owned firearms were ever banned in the United States then the strategy for enforcement would be exactly the same as the strategy used in the past. Ban the guns, offer an amnesty for citizens to surrender their guns and then prosecute people caught with guns after the amnesty date has passed, set up tip lines to allow people to report their neighbors who have not complied, conduct raids when they have actionable information, etc. Look at California. They have had a ban on "semi-automatic assault weapons" in place for about 20 years now. Compliance with that ban is estimated to be at about 15%. They have vigorously sought to end the presence of illegal firearms in California and there are still guns everywhere. Same thing for Chicago, same thing for New York City, same for Washington DC.

I would say the military would be much the same as the general populace.  

Some see things as a matter of patriotic duty and the defense of one's nation.  Some are just there to suck off of the .gov teat.

Those who have considered these issues beforehand will generally be more prepared to refuse unlawful orders.  The rest will just think ".gov provides me with everything I need, I will do anything it asks of me."

As for me, I swore to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and I take every opportunity I can to teach and mentor my Soldiers to think likewise.

Second guy often takes more fire






Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Breaking them economically through costly resistance would be the only chance .

It will most likely start in the big cities first.

Edit: No inside information, just a gut feeling.

When these discussions come up, a lot of the optimistically naive people like to imagine that our Military personnel would somehow resist the idea of confiscating our guns.  They fail to realize that most Military people don't know any more about our Constitution than the average person.   To put it in perspective: Dave A is probably in the top 1% as far as education and intelligence.  

Our Military was able to condition it's troops to attack in the face almost certain death in the Civil War, WWI and WWII.  It's what any Military does, and ours is the best in history.    

To speculate that some wouldn't follow orders is to engage in the worst kind of wishful thinking.  Our battle is going to be won politically, or not at all.

I think you are correct. Ding Dong just needs a big event to get the job done. I only hope people stand up in mass, if not it will be bad...... very bad.

Make this hot for the uninformed.

dude are you serious, they beat that old lady down! was she a thug?!?!?!? and the piont is someone told them to do it and they did.

Thanks for the link!

It would only require compliant judges to legislate from the bench.

Agreed.

That was National Guard, Oklahoma NG to be specific.

Meh, it depends on the unit/mentality.  There are tons of gun guys in the Infantry and I know quite a few that would have no problem telling command units to fuck themselves if given illegal orders to confiscate other people's guns.

That taken into account when does a soldier decide to dissobey his orders.? does that no longer make him a soldier.?

I have no idea, I just thought it strange that we need disciplined soldiers to follow only orders "we" agree with. ?

My 2cents

Cheers
Taffy

When soldiers start dying, the gloves come off and the flashbangs get switched out for HE.
But I think it's irrelevant, any confiscation would fall on LEO's, as in New Orleans. Don't remember anyone there going out in a blaze of glory pool of blood.

Like Washington said, "Men just dragged from the tender scenes of domestick life; unaccustomed to the din of Arms; totally unacquainted with every kind of military skill, which being followed by a want of confidence in themselves, when opposed to Troops regularly train'd, disciplined, and appointed, superior in knowledge and superior in Arms, makes them timid, and ready to fly from their own shadows." (— 6 The Writings of George Washington 110, 112, J. Fitzpatrick, ed., 1931-44)