DHS buying armored cars

[razark]

Question for any former/current military or law enforcement individuals (Americans) here:
If you were given the order to pull the trigger on your fellow American citizens, would you?
Edit:
And how many of your fellow soldiers would have?

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by razark

Question for any former/current military or law enforcement individuals (Americans) here:
If you were given the order to pull the trigger on your fellow American citizens, would you?
Edit:
And how many of your fellow soldiers would have?

More information is needed to answer this question.

A US citizen may decide to rob a bank and then he may murder or attempt to murder another US citizen in that case I would pull the trigger on such a person.Or he may become a threat to the people and join an organization that is a threat to the people and/or the Constitution in that case i would pull the trigger on that person if violence where the only recourse.

The oath sworn states that you will defend the people from any enemy foreign or domestic. A threat to the people to the Constitution can come from outside or within. In other words if the order given is constitutional and valid and just then the trigger shall be pulled.

Honestly I cant say on the second part there a many different people in the military and views vary greatly some are very conservative some are liberal others have no interest in politics.In my experience the political make up armed forces members is as varied as it is in the general population.

[razark]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

More information is needed to answer this question.

I think you answered it sufficiently. From reading your answer, it sounds like you'd actually think before pulling the trigger, and not just fire blindly at anyone the government pointed you at.

From reading certain posts here, I was under the impression that anyone with a government issued gun was just waiting to start killing people on the government's orders.

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by razark

I think you answered it sufficiently. From reading your answer, it sounds like you'd actually think before pulling the trigger, and not just fire blindly at anyone the government pointed you at.

From reading certain posts here, I was under the impression that anyone with a government issued gun was just waiting to start killing people on the government's orders.

It could depend on the individual person though to some extent a person may swear one thing but their integrity may be weak but the goal of the oath is to insure that those in a government position uphold the Constitution.

In theory this prevents a situation where a leader garbs total control from ever happening because those who are to carry out those orders would refuse to obey one that violated the Constitution.

Things have been done many times that in some way where violating the Constitution though.An often ignored example would be Richard Nixon's secret war in Cambodia.

It was members of the military that blew the whistle on this and reported it to Congress.Of course these military officers had been given orders from elsewhere which means that other military members had given these orders even though they where unlawful and not approved by Congress(a war) and where essentially ordering a mission and then having the record of that mission destroyed as soon as the aircrew landed.

Of course Nixon did not nearly get impeached for this violation of office but over a different violation.

You could say that there is a check and balance so to speak when it comes to the "pull the trigger order" on a mass scale such a thing would not fly with those compelled to obey their is a stipulation(does it violate the Constitution and the sworn oath to uphold it)

[August]

The thing is you're not talking about the military but an agency. A much smaller and far more easily subverted organization.

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by August

The thing is you're not talking about the military but an agency. A much smaller and far more easily subverted organization.

I would argue that the larger an agency/organization becomes the more more likely it is to be subverted.The truth is no matter what kind of law a nation has power can be taken if a person or group so desires.

Humans are corruptible by nature to some extent and therefore it is possible for any organization to be corrupted.The only form of government safe from this is no government at all... anarchy.

[August]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

I would argue that the larger an agency/organization becomes the more more likely it is to be subverted.

I don't see how. The larger the organization the more dissenting opinions that one would have to deal with. The military is hundreds of thousands of people. A federal agency is a few hundred agents.

The truth is no matter what kind of law a nation has power can be taken if a person or group so desires.

Humans are corruptible by nature to some extent and therefore it is possible for any organization to be corrupted.

Desire means little unless the mechanics are in place to carry it out. Giving federal law enforcement agencies armored assault capability, in essence creating a mini-army, is just one more step in that direction. Why is this even necessary? The National Guard should have such vehicles available for use if law enforcement needs to use them.

The only form of government safe from this is no government at all... anarchy.

No such thing. No matter how completely any social system breaks down some type of replacement will quickly manifest itself for no other reason that it increases the survival chances of it's members. Humanity 101. Organize or die.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by razark

Question for any former/current military or law enforcement individuals (Americans) here:
If you were given the order to pull the trigger on your fellow American citizens, would you?
Edit:
And how many of your fellow soldiers would have?

It would also depend on the circumstances.

If out of the blue, the POTUS says "Hey! shoot those Americans", I would have a hard time determining whether that is a legal order.

On the other hand, if we have Americans engaged in violent acts against citizens; if they are trying to overthrow our government through violent and unconstitutional ways; if my orders are to secure an area against hostile forces, and I get the order to shoot Americans, I would follow my orders and shoot the violent offenders.

At least I hope I would. In my military career, I was never ordered to shoot Americans, but I was put in many situations where, in safeguarding nuclear material, I had the authorization to protect the material from any unauthorized people. Since I was in Utah at the time, I don't think they were concerned with the ruskies, but from Americans.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Platapus

On the other hand, if we have Americans engaged in violent acts against citizens; if they are trying to overthrow our government through violent and unconstitutional ways; if my orders are to secure an area against hostile forces, and I get the order to shoot Americans, I would follow my orders and shoot the violent offenders.

I would be inclined to believe the Americans demonstrating violent acts and attempting to overthrow the government are no longer citizens. These individuals are now subject to deadly force as a result of their actions.

Peaceful demonstrations are permitted. We have seen many peaceful demonstrations.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

I would be inclined to believe the Americans demonstrating violent acts and attempting to overthrow the government are no longer citizens.

It takes a lot for the government to revoke citizenship of native born Americans. That does, and should always, take a lot of legal review.

So in my opinion, these individuals would still be citizens, just criminals.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Platapus

It takes a lot for the government to revoke citizenship of native born Americans. That does, and should always, take a lot of legal review.

So in my opinion, these individuals would still be citizens, just criminals.

Yes, criminals.

[Spike88]

Originally Posted by Platapus

At least I hope I would. In my military career, I was never ordered to shoot Americans, but I was put in many situations where, in safeguarding nuclear material, I had the authorization to protect the material from any unauthorized people. Since I was in Utah at the time, I don't think they were concerned with the ruskies, but from Americans.

My cousin is enlisted in the Air Force and was tasked with defending an ICBM silo. During one of his shifts a man entered the premises with a raised shotgun. My cousin shot the man and killed him, only to find out that the guy had a suicide note. He wanted to die, but for whatever reason couldn't do it himself, so he entered the base with the intent of dying.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by Spike88

My cousin is enlisted in the Air Force and was tasked with defending an ICBM silo. During one of his shifts a man entered the premises with a raised shotgun. My cousin shot the man and killed him, only to find out that the guy had a suicide note. He wanted to die, but for whatever reason couldn't do it himself, so he entered the base with the intent of dying.

That must have been tough for your cousin. Sorry to hear that your cousin had to go through that. "Suicide by cop" can be devastating to the officer, unwittingly involved in the suicide plot.