TexasCHLforum.com

The Annoyed Man wrote:

VMI77 wrote:We're under the rule of the "know nothing" administration. The only things Obama, Holder, et al, know about what is going on in their government is what they see in the media or hear about from questioning in Congress. Well, to be fair, they may have known of a couple things, but they've "forgotten" them since they happened way back in 2012. My operative assumption is that to the extent the article reflects reality, any change is entirely the product of Obama and his goons, with the military getting the blame. What we have in power now is nothing more than a gang of criminal thugs who will do and say anything to get their way, and with less honor and integrity than the typical tinpot dictator of a banana republic.

You're absolutely right, but I actually trust the military to help restore the constitutional republic if it comes to that. The fact is that, at least at its general officer levels and often among officers below that grade, the military is made up mostly of scholar/warriors with a keen sense of history, a sense of the proper relationship between America's civilian government of The People and the military, and a keen appreciation for the Constitution which they swear to defend.

Obamany Hall cares not for any of that. They only care about power.

I agree, but have more faith in certain parts of the military than others. I have the most faith in Special Forces with each branch probably being more or less equal in that regard, and in the more general sense, in the Marines, but a true warrior is a true warrior no matter what uniform he's wearing. I guess I can rephrase to say that I tend to think in whatever branch, those who possess or are closest to the warrior spirit, are the most likely to participate in a restoration.

The Annoyed Man wrote:

SF18C wrote:While a lot of police departments (city/county/state) may look like military tactical assets they are under a different chain of command and control.

I think this author need to have a better understanding of the Posse Comitatus Act, the Stafford Act and DoD Instruction 3025.21 Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies.

And let’s be honest…if there ever was a Chem/Bio/Radiological hazard in a major metropolitan area, who would have the resources, training and assets to quickly come in and provide assistance.

I'm not worried about the Army coming after me! Now if we are talking about DHS on the other hand????

This ^ .....and I'd add the following:

Here is a quote from the article:

The lines blurred even further Monday as a new dynamic was introduced to the militarization of domestic law enforcement. By making a few subtle changes to a regulation in the U.S. Code titled “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies” 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.

The most objectionable aspect of the regulatory change is the inclusion of vague language that permits military intervention in the event of “civil disturbances.” According to the rule:

Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances.

Since when does "the military" have the constitutional authority to rewrite the U.S. Code? Plainly put, it does not. If this language was changed, it was changed by civilian authorities..........perhaps not constitutionally, but civilian none the less. The military does not write, maintain, guard, or contribute to the U.S. Code; Congress does; so the military cannot "grant itself" new authority by modifications thereof. Heck, it can't even get rid of its responsibilities under the U.S. Code, let alone add to them.

Like SF18C said, I am a LOT less worried about the military than I am about its civilian overlords.

We're under the rule of the "know nothing" administration. The only things Obama, Holder, et al, know about what is going on in their government is what they see in the media or hear about from questioning in Congress. Well, to be fair, they may have known of a couple things, but they've "forgotten" them since they happened way back in 2012. My operative assumption is that to the extent the article reflects reality, any change is entirely the product of Obama and his goons, with the military getting the blame. What we have in power now is nothing more than a gang of criminal thugs who will do and say anything to get their way, and with less honor and integrity than the typical tinpot dictator of a banana republic.

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.

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.

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.