TexasCHLforum.com

Over Civil Disturbances

One step closer to putting in place all that is needed to control the populace? I don't think I like the way this sounds.

...the military has quietly granted itself the ability to police the streets without obtaining prior local or state consent, upending a precedent that has been in place for more than two centuries....

http://www.longislandpress.com/2013/05/ ... to-effect/

Ruh roh.

baldeagle wrote:Ruh roh.

Tick tick tick tick........

Anygunanywhere

Oh no...that's not disturbing at all. I especially like this from the article..

so they can call us to the Hill and ask us to justify why we’re doing something

It is extremely bothersome to me that a military official would have to be called to the Hill and asked to explain why they (the military) were attempting to assert extra authority on US soil.

Obama didn't get to quietly fill our skies with drones capable of being armed since Rand Paul's filibuster, but he apparently did get this little tweak through. I can see NO reason for the military to have the right to act in a state on civil disturbances without that state's say so. Hmmm. Wouldn't this come in handy to quell a "disturbance" of a state's Sheriffs and their constituents resisting being disarmed?

TexasGal wrote:Obama didn't get to quietly fill our skies with drones capable of being armed since Rand Paul's filibuster, but he apparently did get this little tweak through. I can see NO reason for the military to have the right to act in a state on civil disturbances without that state's say so. Hmmm. Wouldn't this come in handy to quell a "disturbance" of a state's Sheriffs and their constituents resisting being disarmed?

This authority and power is desperately needed right now. Don't you read the news? Obama has good reason to be concerned about domestic disturbances.

So does this mean that financial collapse is around the corner and that we'll be segregated and forced into internment camps against our will, after they take our guns?

TheCytochromeC wrote:So does this mean that financial collapse is around the corner and that we'll be segregated and forced into internment camps against our will, after they take our guns?

Whatever is around the corner, I won't ever be forced into an interment camp against my will.

VMI77 wrote:

TheCytochromeC wrote:So does this mean that financial collapse is around the corner and that we'll be segregated and forced into internment camps against our will, after they take our guns?

Whatever is around the corner, I won't ever be forced into an interment camp against my will.

That sounds ever so respectable but I have a girlfriend and family that I care about and wish to have a future so my blaze of glory exit is not seeming too viable. Then again if you're segregated you'd, in all probability, never see them again anyways. If you don't mind me asking, what would you do in such a situation?

TheCytochromeC wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

TheCytochromeC wrote:So does this mean that financial collapse is around the corner and that we'll be segregated and forced into internment camps against our will, after they take our guns?

Whatever is around the corner, I won't ever be forced into an interment camp against my will.

That sounds ever so respectable but I have a girlfriend and family that I care about and wish to have a future so my blaze of glory exit is not seeming too viable. Then again if you're segregated you'd, in all probability, never see them again anyways. If you don't mind me asking, what would you do in such a situation?

A lot of good men had to make a choice to leave their loved ones in WW1... WW2... Vietnam... and that wasn't even on our own soil. I don't know about you, but I'm going to do my absolute best to make sure they have a shot at a future. And meekly letting yourself be taken is not the way to do that (maybe temporarily).

Took a quick look thru the article, don't believe I will be quaking in my boots over some author who quotes from The Daily Kos.

Also some base-stealing going on in that article. It tries to use the Kent State shootings as a "disasterous" use of federal military forces, but this is very disingenuous. The Ohio Army National Guard was used at Kent State, and while it has its federal role, it is also of course a State force as well. The Mayor of Kent called on the Governor for help, and the Governor sent the Guard on his authority.

Having the military back up the cops when civil disorder breaks out has a long history in America. The key to not being worried about this is to NOT elect unAmericans to positions of power over the military, the IRS, the EPA, or any other part of the government. There is only so much you can do structurally with constitutions and laws; the real key, like with any organization, is to put good people in the right positions. America has failed miserable at this in the past two presidential elections.

TheCytochromeC wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

TheCytochromeC wrote:So does this mean that financial collapse is around the corner and that we'll be segregated and forced into internment camps against our will, after they take our guns?

Whatever is around the corner, I won't ever be forced into an interment camp against my will.

That sounds ever so respectable but I have a girlfriend and family that I care about and wish to have a future so my blaze of glory exit is not seeming too viable. Then again if you're segregated you'd, in all probability, never see them again anyways. If you don't mind me asking, what would you do in such a situation?

First, let me make it clear that all this is purely hypothetical. It's not something I expect to happen, especially in the near future. Given that, we have to look at the extremes. Here in the US American citizens of Japanese descent were interned during WW2 and lived through it --though most of them lost all of their property. OTOH, we didn't have a Socialist/Marxist/Communist government back then. When we look at the Socialist end of the government spectrum we see roundups leading to extermination. We are headed now towards the Socialist end of the spectrum. In fact, we might argue we're already there. The difference between the two types of government is essentially the difference between individual rights and collectivism. Socialists are collectivists, and under collectivism, individuals don't have rights, so exterminating a group of people to advance the Socialist Utopia is not just acceptable, it's mandatory.

It basically comes down to the same decision you have to make if you find yourself at the end of a gun during a home invasion. Are you going to trust the good intentions of the thugs that invaded your home or are you going to defend yourself? Are you going to let them tie you and your family up based on their promise you'll be OK if you do? That's your choice. If the government comes to put you in an interment camp are you going to trust THAT government's promises? It's not like such an event is unprecedented. History tells us how government mass roundups have worked out for the vast majority of those targeted. I actually don't think such mass roundups are feasible in the US. Mass gun confiscations are more likely, though probably not feasible either --and of course, a gun confiscation is an entirely different matter than being rounded up for internment.

Again, this is all extremely hypothetical, and I'm not predicting or expecting it to happen, but I will try to answer your question in the remote chance that it could. You say you want a future....we all do. The question for me is what kind of future? I don't consider life in an interment camp a future. And what makes you think that a government that comes to herd you into an internment camp won't also rape your girlfriend, or force her into prostitution? I'm not seeking any glory, and the plain fact is, if such a scenario unfolds, there won't be any glory. Just submission or death. What I will do will depend on the specific circumstances of what is happening. My first choice will be to avoid confrontation, just like I don't intentionally put myself into situations where I might have to defend myself with a gun. I like the now politically incorrect New Hampshire state motto: "Live free, or Die." All I'm saying is that if it comes to the point where I am forced to choose death over enslavement I will choose death, and the only thing going to an internment camp will be my lifeless body. There are worse things than death.

VMI77 wrote:Again, this is all extremely hypothetical, and I'm not predicting or expecting it to happen, but I will try to answer your question in the remote chance that it could. You say you want a future....we all do. The question for me is what kind of future? I don't consider life in an interment camp a future. And what makes you think that a government that comes to herd you into an internment camp won't also rape your girlfriend, or force her into prostitution? I'm not seeking any glory, and the plain fact is, if such a scenario unfolds, there won't be any glory. Just submission or death. What I will do will depend on the specific circumstances of what is happening. My first choice will be to avoid confrontation, just like I don't intentionally put myself into situations where I might have to defend myself with a gun. I like the now politically incorrect New Hampshire state motto: "Live free, or Die." All I'm saying is that if it comes to the point where I am forced to choose death over enslavement I will choose death, and the only thing going to an internment camp will be my lifeless body. There are worse things than death.

I didn't serve in the military so I could be enslaved, and I will not be enslaved. There are definitely things worse than death, and slavery is one of them.

baldeagle wrote:

VMI77 wrote:Again, this is all extremely hypothetical, and I'm not predicting or expecting it to happen, but I will try to answer your question in the remote chance that it could. You say you want a future....we all do. The question for me is what kind of future? I don't consider life in an interment camp a future. And what makes you think that a government that comes to herd you into an internment camp won't also rape your girlfriend, or force her into prostitution? I'm not seeking any glory, and the plain fact is, if such a scenario unfolds, there won't be any glory. Just submission or death. What I will do will depend on the specific circumstances of what is happening. My first choice will be to avoid confrontation, just like I don't intentionally put myself into situations where I might have to defend myself with a gun. I like the now politically incorrect New Hampshire state motto: "Live free, or Die." All I'm saying is that if it comes to the point where I am forced to choose death over enslavement I will choose death, and the only thing going to an internment camp will be my lifeless body. There are worse things than death.

I didn't serve in the military so I could be enslaved, and I will not be enslaved. There are definitely things worse than death, and slavery is one of them.

Well said...

TheCytochromeC wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

TheCytochromeC wrote:So does this mean that financial collapse is around the corner and that we'll be segregated and forced into internment camps against our will, after they take our guns?

Whatever is around the corner, I won't ever be forced into an interment camp against my will.

That sounds ever so respectable but I have a girlfriend and family that I care about and wish to have a future so my blaze of glory exit is not seeming too viable. Then again if you're segregated you'd, in all probability, never see them again anyways. If you don't mind me asking, what would you do in such a situation?

Most if not all of us have loved-ones. I too would refuse being transported to an internment camp. I would defend myself and I certainly don't see it as a 'blaze of glory' event.