For the LEOs and military men/women.

[jeremy]

Bud, it's a stupid poll.

You Jack Booted Thug you....

If you havent noticed the enemies to the constitution are working on wall street and in Washington, so why arent you doing something about it. You swore an oath right?

Actually, I could counter that the Enemies of the Constitution are the American Citizens...

After all are they not the ones who have willingly, and freely elected those in Washington that allows those on Wall Street to have Power...

Personally, it is a shame dueling is illegal...

To me the COTUS and bill of rights have no "grey area" when it comes to the second amendment, therefore this is poll should have no "grey area". The only reason it would have a grey area is if the person answering wanted it to have so they could rationalize their answer.

No grey areas...

How about John Walker Lindh...
or
John "the Silk-King Thompson...

Those are 2 Americans just off the top of my head. Grey areas...

 

[jeremy]

Jeremy, I believe the "foreign and domestic" refers specifically to a tyrannical government as "the people" are the nation and cannot be the enemy of themselves. It is for the gov. to do the will of the people, not the other way around. While some day "the people" may become the enemy of the gov, the oath is to defend and protect "we the people", not the statist pigs attempting to govern them as livestock...

So the only Enemies to the Constitution are States?!
Huh...

So Mr. Lindh is not a Domestic Enemy?!

 

[KLB]

Respect is one thing. Kissing their ass is a whole different story.

Why show them respect? I DONT respect them.

How stupid is that.

Any cop that gives somebody a ticket for 59 in a 55 is a D1CKHEAD (unless inclement weather conditions)

And no, I never consent to the search. I dont remember saying that I did? You are putting words in my mouth.

By the way, Ive never had a moving violation in my life. Want to know why? The cops never show up to court. They can do that, apparently.

Write as many revenue requests (tickets) as they can, and see how many of them stick

Wow. To have no respect for any LEO is sad. I have issues with some of the things done by them. Most of them really have little to do with the individual officers though.

I don't imagine that an officer goes out on patrol and decides it is a nice day to setup and give speeding tickets. I am betting they are directed to. They are trying to perform their duties in such a way as to be seen as doing a good job like most people do. The problem is the directive to write the tickets, not the actual writing of the ticket. It seems to me that you should be happy that those officers did not show up. Maybe that was their way of giving you an out for a ticket they were not happy about writing.

 

[fireblade]

Actually, I could counter that the Enemies of the Constitution are the American Citizens...

After all are they not the ones who have willingly, and freely elected those in Washington that allows those on Wall Street to have Power...

Personally, it is a shame dueling is illegal...

.

what the **** ........................i better go get a cup of coffee for this one.....

 

[jeremy]

what the **** ........................i better go get a cup of coffee for this one.....

Why...

It made as much sense as the BS spouted by dlbrown that it was used to answer...

 

[fireblade]

true ..... what a firestorm here still doesn't stop the fact i need a cup of coffee......

 

[ThrottleJockey]

How stupid is that.

Any cop that gives somebody a ticket for 59 in a 55 is a D1CKHEAD (unless inclement weather conditions)

And no, I never consent to the search. I dont remember saying that I did? You are putting words in my mouth.

By the way, Ive never had a moving violation in my life. Want to know why? The cops never show up to court. They can do that, apparently.

Write as many revenue requests (tickets) as they can, and see how many of them stick.


Ive got no use for cops.

This one I'm going to call BS on. I've tried it. Even when they don't show up the court just looks at the officers schedule and continues the case until his/her next "day in court".

 

[UncleMike]

OK.....
I know I'm getting old and all but........
It seem like someone is missing.....
I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine those threads.


Or did I???

 

[Hoosierdood]

OK.....
I know I'm getting old and all but........
It seem like someone is missing.....
I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine those threads.


Or did I???

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4zyjLyBp64[/ame]

 

[dlbrown75]

Actually, I could counter that the Enemies of the Constitution are the American Citizens...

After all are they not the ones who have willingly, and freely elected those in Washington that allows those on Wall Street to have Power...


No, not at all. MONEY buys elections. Obama's camp have said they need 1 BILLION dollars for the re-election. So, as I am sure even you can see, the people running this country have BOUGHT their positions. Even in local elections if you dont have the money for t.v, radio, bill boards, yard signs, etc. you can forget trying to win an election.

The only bs around here is coming from your IM IN CHARGE sir, you do as I say attitude.

 

[fireblade]

IBTL

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0j7Ksi8v7JY&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0j7Ksi8v7JY&feature=related[/ame]


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpTd4LrWEi8&feature=related"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpTd4LrWEi8&feature=related[/ame]

 

[jsharmon7]

OK.....
I know I'm getting old and all but........
It seem like someone is missing.....
I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine those threads.


Or did I???

Somebody went bye-bye. I'm sad.

 

[fireblade]

Somebody went bye-bye. I'm sad.

what are you guys talking about ?

 

[Lex Concord]

This one I'm going to call BS on. I've tried it. Even when they don't show up the court just looks at the officers schedule and continues the case until his/her next "day in court".

Every time I've actually gone to court (it has ben years...I drive 54.95 MPH on 465 now...yep, that's me ), no LEO...case dismissed...once en masse (8 defendants called up to bench..."officers in your cases not here today...cases dismissed"

Have fun paying if the LEO does show, however...

 

[Lex Concord]

Bud, it's a stupid poll.

I saw that you voted without question...I knew you were just a stereotypical JBT...thanks for confirming it

 

[Denny347]

I still don't like cops tho

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I would only take the guns of rhino as he owes me soooo much .45acp for violations of the First Law of the Internet that executing the lien on his guns will only being to pay his ammo debt.

Hmmm, maybe if the cops took the guns of the PLA I'd come close to justice.

 

[Denny347]

I saw that you voted without question...I knew you were just a stereotypical JBT...thanks for confirming it

Shhhhhh, it'll be our little secret. Just between you and me ok.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

If you don't mind sir i would like to answer this question i love how this question is worded by the way


first a recap of the seriousness of this..............

as a United States military personal you are required to obey lawful orders and disobey an unlawful order.


First lawful order:

Military members who fail to obey the lawful orders of their superiors risk serious consequences. article 90 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice ( UCMJ) makes it a crime for a military member to WILLFULLY disobey a superior commissioned officer. Article 92 makes it a crime to WILLFULLY disobey a superior Noncommissioned or Warrant Officer. Article 92 makes it a crime to disobey any lawful order (the disobedience does not have to be "willful" under this article).

In fact, under Article 90, during times of war, a military member who willfully disobeys a superior commissioned officer can be sentenced to death.

　

Unlawful order:

　

An order which is unlawful not only does not need to be obeyed, but obeying such an order can result in criminal prosecution of the one who obeys it. Military courts have long held that military members are accountable for their actions even while following orders -- if the order was illegal. If you are ordered to violate Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, it is your duty to disobey that order. No "clarification," whether passed by Congress or signed by the president, relieves you of that duty.

Now the oath we the military personnel take ..............

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.



Now to your question how i would answer it .........First off it goes against the fourth Amendment to guard against searches and seizures.......... second it goes against the second amendment that guarantees the right of individuals to possess weapons............ third taking civilian hostages is against Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and the United states Constitution.

If you asked me if i would get that response from Jag from a person who been in from 1988 to 2010...........NO..... they will what if the scenario to death .............there first response would be well under martial law .........then the whole operation garden stuff ...........etc.

Here the good news us military men and women take our oath to defend the Constitution very seriously and give there lives for it if they must . There is a reason its first.................... Per forum rules i will not get in the detail on what would happen if other soldiers did stuff like your question asked . Be reassured there a lot i mean alot of officers and NCO's who believe in this great country and the Constitution and Bill of Rights that made it great. I have served with them and trained with them and bleed with them...

Here's the problem with your reasoning, as explained to me by the HR-Instructor on the "Constitution and its Application to Military Personnel and Civilian Technicians" class I had to take when I was a temporary technician with the Indiana Guard.

The Constitution means what the Supreme Court says it means. If they want to interpret law so as to abrogate what you perceive as your Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms, they are right and you are wrong. This applies all down the line where questions of Constitutional Law come up. I got into an almost nasty discussion with the guy over "Plain Language" and "Founders' Intent" and in the end it makes no difference, policy-wise, to the military hierarchy. They will follow the law, guided by their JAGs, and if the law can be twisted to encompass disarming the American populace - and if the Supreme Court agrees - they will order it done.

I hope you will agree with me that that is a loophole which needs to be plugged, and can only be plugged by influencing the makeup of the Supreme Court. This is why it is important that Conservatives take the Senate and why it's important to not reelect the current President.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

If you havent noticed the enemies to the constitution are working on wall street and in Washington, so why arent you doing something about it. You swore an oath right?

Point 'em out to us by name, specify the charges, provide the proof of their perfidity, and let's go from there. Otherwise, perhaps you should just quietly sink back into the mire . . .