1
1
0
<p>This is totally a discussion based question. Would Like personal opinions.</p><p>You are the Leaders or soldiers of the unit that is ordered to go door to door and take weapons from citizens as it is illegal to posses after 200+ years of the second amendment. You are let's Say National Guard and or Reserve component inside your respective states.</p><p>And Go.......</p>
Gun Control
Orders
UCMJ
Edited 12 y ago
Posted 12 y ago
Responses: 23
4
4
0
Army Reserve or RA, I refuse the order which violates Posse Comitatus, and ensure my higher leadership is aware of the act.
National Guard... I would behave differently.
National Guard... I would behave differently.
(4)
(0)
PO2 Steven Erickson
So... are you saying as ANG you would try to execute this order? I'm not looking for a fight. I'd just like to know.
(1)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Posse Comitatus does not apply to National Guard IF they are on a state mission under the governor's orders.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
#1. There must be a law stating it is illegal to possess weapons.
#2. Illegal order for an active or reserve Soldier. See Posse Comitatus law. Federal forces can not be used as police forces against/on US citizens. Since this is an illegal order the Soldier given the order has a duty not to obey the order.
#3. Illegal order for National Guard Soldier unless they have been deputized. Posse Comitatus does not apply since National Guard by definition are state forces, not a federal force. If not deputized then this is an illegal order in my opinion. If deputized then there must be a law on the books that the deputized National Guard Soldier is enforcing.
#4. Even if there is a law on the books outlawing gun possession and even if a NG Soldier is properly deputized then there still must be due process, search warrants, reasonable suspicion, etc. Even police officers (local, state, federal) can not enter a home because they want to. They have to have authorization.
#5. Bottom line. Lot of hurdles to overcome to even get to the point where the original question is worthy of discussion. The question assumes a lot just in the question itself.
#2. Illegal order for an active or reserve Soldier. See Posse Comitatus law. Federal forces can not be used as police forces against/on US citizens. Since this is an illegal order the Soldier given the order has a duty not to obey the order.
#3. Illegal order for National Guard Soldier unless they have been deputized. Posse Comitatus does not apply since National Guard by definition are state forces, not a federal force. If not deputized then this is an illegal order in my opinion. If deputized then there must be a law on the books that the deputized National Guard Soldier is enforcing.
#4. Even if there is a law on the books outlawing gun possession and even if a NG Soldier is properly deputized then there still must be due process, search warrants, reasonable suspicion, etc. Even police officers (local, state, federal) can not enter a home because they want to. They have to have authorization.
#5. Bottom line. Lot of hurdles to overcome to even get to the point where the original question is worthy of discussion. The question assumes a lot just in the question itself.
(3)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Sir, I'm sure that you are aware of this. I just want to clear it up for others. Posse Comitatus does apply to the National Guard IF they are on title 10 orders. However, I really don't see this scenario playing out.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
If I am not willing to give up my weapons how can I expect others? In this hypothesis does that mean we now have to willingly turn our own over first? And if WE refuse what would the punishment be and who would enforce it? (See what I did there) :)
(3)
(0)
PO1 (Join to see)
I mean our own personal weapons. Come in my house uninvited and I can ensure you a meeting between the two will be swift.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
<p>I do not own a gun nor do I intend to at all, however what is going on? Are we witnessing some kind of bloodless clue within the parameters of the current laws? That kind of stuff is scary and personal rights seem to be fading. Why?</p><p><br></p><p>This country is under assault. Wack jobs like David Koresh and Jim Jones are just that, crazy. Not the rest of us.</p>
(3)
(0)
SFC Craig Dalen
I never heard of this. I do not believe that this could happen and it definintely should NOT happen! We fight for the freedoms of this great country and I refuse to believe that a law this retarded could ever pass. This would be the beginning of the end for the U.S.
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
We wouldn't be able infringe on the 2nd Amendment. Our job is to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, first and foremost. I have posted this a couple of times already; but the Constitution represents the people and the rules to the Federal government. We, the service members, ultimately work for the people because of this. The Constitution is suppose to protect the people from a tyranny government. They can't use us against the people and sure as hell can't use us to infringe on their rights. Our government may not be run as our founding fathers intended exactly; but it is still a smart system. As many of us know, our government created by rebels; and they wanted to make sure that it was the government who worked for the people, not the other way around.
(2)
(0)
SGT Bryon Sergent
I had read an article that the POTUS was trying to sign the UN treaty that would take our weapons. The thought was if the 2nd Amendment was taken and the order was given kinda thing. I know that the 2nd Amendment entitles us to that.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I would turn in my stripes before I give that order to my Soldiers. I swore to defend the Constitution against all enemies, both foreign AND domestic.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
2
2
0
Now the real question, which would alter the balance of responses, would be this next scenario:
If the entire country is placed under martial law (as absurd as it may sound), would those still active in the military actually follow orders to suspend the freedom of movement, repossession of weapons, and forfeiture of property?
Martial law is not voted upon by the states; in fact, either Congress OR the President can declare martial law, so that is MUCH more likely than a change in the Constitution.
So, if your Commander in Chief, or the Congress (which has the authority to declare war, which must be abided by the soldiers in the armed forces) declares martial law, do you then follow those orders, or do you disobey and get sentenced to jail, or simply executed by your own leadership?
If the entire country is placed under martial law (as absurd as it may sound), would those still active in the military actually follow orders to suspend the freedom of movement, repossession of weapons, and forfeiture of property?
Martial law is not voted upon by the states; in fact, either Congress OR the President can declare martial law, so that is MUCH more likely than a change in the Constitution.
So, if your Commander in Chief, or the Congress (which has the authority to declare war, which must be abided by the soldiers in the armed forces) declares martial law, do you then follow those orders, or do you disobey and get sentenced to jail, or simply executed by your own leadership?
(Again, I know this is highly absurd, but the hypothetical is great for opening self awareness and learning where your decisions will ultimately lead you in your personal life).
(2)
(0)
SPC Christopher Seitler
And that is the dilemma.
How many service members would, if ordered by a superior, actively disregard that order? I believe that discipline is drilled so much into the heads of service members that they (active members) sometimes forget to consider the moral repercussions of their actions. Granted, we are trained to listen and follow orders far more than we are told to consider the outcomes.
Outcome is not the lane of the E1-5 (and really, O1-O3) soldiers. That lane is to do as they are told, while allowing the higher ranking members and officers to consider the outcomes.
Ask yourself, if you are facing your company, and you are the only person that disagrees with the order, would you stand defiant against your entire company? Would you accept certain jail time, or possible on-the-spot execution (in most severe cases), or would you willingly obey the orders in the name of self preservation?
The answers are very easy to think of in a calm and normative environment, but when in the actual situation, the outcomes are far more often leaning towards the latter.
Nazi Germany is a prime example. I suggest reading the book "Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland" for a very eye-opening illustration of what happens in these types of circumstances.
(1)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
This isn't an issue for me. I will NOT follow an order that requires me to infringe on someones Constitutional rights. I don't care if I get executed on the spot. Hopefully I take one of the bastards out in the process. I joined to keep my family, friends, and fellow American's free from oppression. I am most certainly not going to become the oppressor. I'll die first.
(4)
(0)
SPC Christopher Seitler
I commend your tenacity. That is something that is desperately missing from our present-day society.
(1)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
I obviously don't speak for anyone but myself, however I think that the general public would be shocked by the amount of us who have the tenacity to refuse an unconstitutional order.
I wouldn't have a huge problem with martial law, but all that means is that the National Guard would be law enforcement. If a regular cop can't go door to door taking people's weapons, neither can a National Guard unit.
Again, I don't know very many people who would go along. Especially if someone else makes the first verbal refusal. Which I would take pride in doing, assuming that this ever happened.
(1)
(0)
3
2
1
SFC (Join to see)
Your AC, I'm Guard, we interact with the community on a personal level consistently, yes, there is much more attachment to civilian rights. Just how the cookie crumbles. My western State Guard members spittin' chew, and herding cattle are going to go get rifles and shotguns from their neighbors?, they'd share the Government issue rounds with 'em. hypothetical of course.
(1)
(0)
SPC Charles Brown
I'm sorry, but to me this constitutes an illegal order. As is written in the 2nd amendment of our Constitution we as citizens are guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms. Personally I would refuse to follow this order and willingly go to court martial for the "offense" and use the 2nd amendment as my defense for not following orders. My opinion, so let the storm of how wrong I am begin.
(4)
(0)
SSG(P) (Join to see)
If the constitution is legally amended, then I would follow the order. If the Constitution is not amended, I would absolutely refuse. Assuming that I was told to do it anyway, I would rip the uniform off, flip my supervisor the finger, and begin an armed resistance.
That's just me.
That's just me.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google