If martial law is declared, would you disarm American citizens? Does it conflict with our oath?

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 22:56:20 -0400

I am an American Soldier. I will support and defend the constitution of the United States of America against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. I take this part of my oath with the m o st seriousness. What I mean by that is I feel it is the most important. Will you stand by your oath? i.e if martial law is declared, and I am ordered to disarm American citizens then I will not obey that order because in my eyes it is treason. What are your thoughts?

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Apr 23 at 2015 11:21 PM

MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 23:21:03 -0400

It's a catch 22. We support and defend the constitution which grants the rights of citizens to bear arms BUT if those armed citizens become a domestic enemy through insurrection we are bound to defend the rest of the constitution that they are insurrecting against. Unless martial law is declared at the federal level, it will most likely be individual state National Guards, IMHO the only authorized standing militia, who will be facing off, not the US Army.

Makes one's head spin.

Response by TSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 24 at 2015 5:06 AM

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Apr 2015 05:06:49 -0400

I think the first thing that needs to be pointed out is the illegality of Federal troops to act in a law enforcement role (18 USC 1385 aka Posse Comitatus Act). There is a little wiggle room with the Insurrection Act 1807, but the requirements therein require a little more than people refusing to hand over guns.

Now, in regards to National Guard disarming civilians, I'm of the opinion that the only way that will happen is via acute lead toxicity. Those of us who own firearms are pretty insistent on not having them taken away without transparent, due process.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Apr 24 at 2015 7:29 AM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Fri, 24 Apr 2015 07:29:22 -0400

The President doesn't have the Power to declare Martial Law. It's not one of his listed powers in the Constitution.

The Active Duty Army is prohibited from be used as Law Enforcement inside the US (Posse Comitatus Act). This does not apply to the Naval Services, or the National Guard.

Officers do not have the same Oath as enlisted (the President bit is not there). Enlisted swear first to protect the Constitution.

As such, it would be an illegal order. It would never make it down to the troop level.

TINFOIL HAT.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Apr 24 at 2015 3:01 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Fri, 24 Apr 2015 15:01:23 -0400

We need more snipers.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 24 at 2015 3:28 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Apr 2015 15:28:57 -0400

If martial law is declared then not only is it not against your oath to disarm Americans, you would actually be in violation of said oath. The "obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me" part is still in there too. That being said suspension of habeas corpus (what martial law is in the US) can only be instituted "when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it" (article 1 section 9 USC). If you fail to obey your orders during such a time you are not avoiding treason, you are in fact failing to follow direct orders which may be punished under UCMJ.

Response by SPC Carl K. made Apr 24 at 2015 8:04 PM

SPC Carl K. — Fri, 24 Apr 2015 20:04:49 -0400

I see the conundrum here, and quite frankly, if Martial Law is invoked, I believe we would see more soldiers not willing to follow those orders. I agree with the O.P. With that said, the one thing most seem to forget is that in the event of Martial Law, the Constitution is suspended, as well as Habeus Corpus. I also believe all hell will break loose and I am not sure how organized anything will be, so how realistic would it be that the military could even do this, especially in today's climate with so many people who are prepping for just such an event?

Response by Capt Mark Strobl made Apr 24 at 2015 8:13 PM

Capt Mark Strobl — Fri, 24 Apr 2015 20:13:46 -0400

First, a declaration of Martial Law is highly unlikely. However, most of us on these boards took an oath to the Constitution. And to my knowledge, none of these oath had an "expiration date." However, should you be ordered to disarm your fellow citizen, I would 1.) ask you to reflect on the legality (the "Constitutionality") of such an order, 2.) make a well-informed, conscious decision to either execute or deny the order, and 3.) wish you a lot of luck. Just keep in mind that a declaration of martial law doesn't vacate the Constitutional rights ...say like to form an armed militia to stand in the face of tyranny.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 25 at 2015 1:59 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 25 Apr 2015 01:59:30 -0400

I would not take guns away from law abiding citizens. Let me leave it at that.

Response by MSgt Jamie Lyons made Apr 25 at 2015 7:15 AM

MSgt Jamie Lyons — Sat, 25 Apr 2015 07:15:05 -0400

Interesting question as recently (within last 6 months), I was in a doctor's office waiting to be called for my appointment and I was reading a random magazine from the table that was exactly about your question. I can't recall the exact numbers but basically the sum of the article was the military force ( with inclusion of law enforcement, nation guard, coast guard, FBI et al) would only provide a force equivalent to 5% of the US population. This suggested the other 95% would be the group trying to be controlled. After a discussion concernijg compliance by some in thay 95%, the article suggested that nearly 83% would counteract a disarming order deliverd by the POTUS. So essentially, 83% against 5%. Which side of the war would you want to be on?

I dont remember what magazine it was but I will try to find it again during my next visit for reference.

Response by SGT Nia Chiaraluce made Apr 25 at 2015 8:34 AM

SGT Nia Chiaraluce — Sat, 25 Apr 2015 08:34:35 -0400

I have never heard of that, however I see your concern. I know many I still stand with that couldn't in Afghanistan nevermind here.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Apr 25 at 2015 2:40 PM

CAPT Kevin B. — Sat, 25 Apr 2015 14:40:36 -0400

The name of the movie would be "Blue Dawn".

Response by 1LT William Clardy made Apr 25 at 2015 5:15 PM

1LT William Clardy — Sat, 25 Apr 2015 17:15:49 -0400

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member, your eyes need some reading glasses.

Neither enforcing martial law nor disarming citizens are included in the legal definition of treason, to wit:

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court." (Constitution of the United States, Article III, Section 3)

Response by 1SG David Niles made Apr 25 at 2015 10:01 PM

1SG David Niles — Sat, 25 Apr 2015 22:01:29 -0400

I am an American veteran I will defend my family, home, city, county, state

Response by PO3 Ken Jeschonek made Apr 27 at 2015 12:47 AM

PO3 Ken Jeschonek — Mon, 27 Apr 2015 00:47:31 -0400

From reading the following, it would take some very unique and harsh circumstances for the seizure of our weapons to ever be needed.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/martial+law

Martial Law

Definition of Martial Law in the Legal Dictionary by The Free Dictionary

Response by 1SG Scott MacGregor made Apr 27 at 2015 11:59 AM

1SG Scott MacGregor — Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:59:46 -0400

No matter if martial law is declared or not, cops, troops can't be on your doorstep 24/7 to provide protection. That would be especially true under martial law when those resources are being utilized for other services. Police won't respond to "routine" calls unless someone dies, and even then you may not get the services you need. Look at Katrina and the total lack of service when people took refuge in the Saints stadium.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Apr 30 at 2015 6:26 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Thu, 30 Apr 2015 18:26:05 -0400

What if it was Katrina all over again with civilians randomly killing other civilians?

Response by SGT Hector Rojas, AIGA, SHA made May 24 at 2015 1:57 AM

SGT Hector Rojas, AIGA, SHA — Sun, 24 May 2015 01:57:03 -0400

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member , shouldn't you first of all, find out if Martial Law is Constitutional?

Well, it is, ex parte Milligan setlled it in 1866. The suspension of Habeas Corpus is unconstitutional, but the declaration of Martial Law itself, is Constitutional.

So, with that said, if you refuse to obey orders that are lawful, then who's committing a treasonous act in a time of dire need such that necessitates the implementation of Martial Law?

Further, Martial Law has been implemented in the US several times, and here we still are, arguing about the horrors of what will happen when it is implemented...

Remember, any order is assumed to be lawful, if you chose to disobey it, you do so at your own peril pending a Court Martial to either vindicate or convict you. Just because in your eyes something is treason does not make it so.

Cheers!

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made May 24 at 2015 2:15 AM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 24 May 2015 02:15:45 -0400

My duty is to the constitution, the people of this nation, and the government in that order. At least that's how I would interpret it in that situation.

If my orders are to both protect and defend the constitution and the people of this country, then by default I should be in line with any lawful order that would come down. If not, there's a problem. Its hard to say either way though.

Response by MSG Brad Sand made Dec 11 at 2015 8:21 AM

MSG Brad Sand — Fri, 11 Dec 2015 08:21:14 -0500

If in your eyes it is treason, it would seem to me to be an unlawful order? We do not follow unlawful orders...we don't and should not. Your question is actually missing a lot of specifics that would be very important to any true answer. We take our oath to the Constitution and not a person, but we also follow ALL lawful orders. No individual gets to not follow a lawful order, if you think you can pick and choose which orders you have to follow you are wrong and will end up putting yourself on the wrong side of the law, but the same could be said for blindly following an unlawful order?

Response by SFC Alfred Galloway made Aug 1 at 2016 12:44 PM

SFC Alfred Galloway — Mon, 01 Aug 2016 12:44:06 -0400

No, but then I'm retired.
I have spoken with many serving members of the armed forces, they agree that NO would be their answers.

Sadly there are many Junior enlisted that would because they aren't as versed when an officer issues the order. the vast majority of E-5 to E-9 and O-4 thru O-6 would not support or follow such an order, I cannot gainsay what E-1 to E-4 would do or what O-1 to O-3 or O-7 up would do. Those are the unpredictable variables which would have to be considered.

I would hope that anyone opposing a gun grab (for lack of better words) or the Government saying anyone was a Terrorist simply because they refuse to turn them in would have the senior military services balking at such a blanket EO or law.

Hopefully E-1 to E-4 would not blindly follow an order, and that all officers would not blindly follow that common sense would prevail, and that armed citizens wouldn't attack the serving military that they would bypass them entirely, for to attack the military in any strength would provoke the military to reacting in a very unhealthy way.

Response by SGT Alejandro Sarandrea made Aug 1 at 2016 1:36 PM

SGT Alejandro Sarandrea — Mon, 01 Aug 2016 13:36:35 -0400

The oath uses specifically the term "enemies" to qualify the basis of making a decision on the question your asking. If martial law is called for you have to assume the declaration isn't being contested by congress and it is a legal action with proper justification. If that is the case I would seize the weapons of specific people, but I will not be a part of general seizures, unless congress amends the constitution, as the constitution protects against general search and seizure. If it's not a legal declaration with proper justification I would have a moral duty to disobey any illegal or non lawful order.

Response by CPT Chris Newport made Sep 6 at 2016 8:42 PM

CPT Chris Newport — Tue, 06 Sep 2016 20:42:31 -0400

I would either shoot my Officer as a traitor or just sneak off to join the other side bringing as much ammo and gear as I can. Understand, for every person your unit disarms under those circumstances at least one Soldier will die with the American Citizen victim. Such is the state of our country at the moment. You have M16s, we have 30-06 caliber rifles. We are ready to do our duty to our Soldier's Oaths and die for it, is your unit? Now is the time to think this through.

Response by LCpl Todd Houston made Sep 7 at 2016 8:04 AM

LCpl Todd Houston — Wed, 07 Sep 2016 08:04:02 -0400

I was stationed at camp pndleton during the LA riots after the Rodney King beating. My unit assigned 20 individuals to draw weapons and ammo.( mine was an M60). They they asked for 10 more volunteers. I could not believe the people who were excided at the opportunity. I was disgusted by them. One Sgt. Signed up, I said you are married and have 3 kids, why? He said im a Marine. I said, your an idiot. The prospect of going into LA with an M60 and two bandoleers made me sick to my stomach. God forbid I get shot and now that weapon is on the streets!! But worse, we weren't going up to disarm anyone. The government wanted them gone. Plain and simple. I thank God we didn't end up going. Many more people would have been killed.

Response by SFC Jeffrey Couch made Jan 25 at 2017 2:50 AM

SFC Jeffrey Couch — Wed, 25 Jan 2017 02:50:26 -0500

I would like to add something else to your post SPC voye I would like to read responses from both sides active and retired what would the reason behind your awnser

Response by SFC Keith Seago made Sep 5 at 2019 3:48 PM

SFC Keith Seago — Thu, 05 Sep 2019 15:48:32 -0400

I would never do that. Nor do I believe the NCO's that I served under would ever ask me to.