It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

An Alternative Perspective on The Police State

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2015 @ 11:19 PM
link   
Just now after the incident in Chattanooga, articles are popping everywhere now calling for an end to "gun free zones" for our military. Many people, naturally some who frequent this site are going to immediately try to exaggerate that term to tie in some conspiratorial theory around the Jade Helm exercise.

Just think before you do that, our military bases and public recruiting offices are the 'gun free zones' in question and yes that needs to change. There's no argument you can rationally make against that. This doesn't mean armed guards on every street corner or martial law.

The one thing that I've never really understood around the paranoid theories of the police state, is the simple fact that if it ever were to happen on the scale that is often imagined, the majority of the armed guards and patrols in America are going to be made up primarily of my kind of people, traditional Americans. These are the same people that aren't going to give up the same rights, many think they're out to take away.

That being said, anyone who may not feel like they don't necessarily identify with traditional America or it's values and are more inclined to the modern perspectives that are trying to redefine those values, ...it's time to either shut up or pack your bags, because your starting to scratch a very quiet, a very patient, a very sound, traditional and enforceful majority. And if a police state is what it's going to take to reestablish our traditional American values, well It's not our rights that will be infringed.

I know, I know, I can hear it now, "but that's what they want you to do!" "they want you to welcome this police state, if not demand it." "It's all part of the plan!" ...and to that I say, you've been drinkin way too much of your own koolaid. We're currently transcending the age of speculation regarding these issues and entering an era of actualization. It's time to pause and recess any old entertaining, fanciful, doom and gloom theories. Why would you be afraid of your friends and neighbors who take up these guarding patriotic roles to protect you? They're not going to take your guns, they're not going to take you're rights, they're going to defend them. Defend them from the radical proponents that are trying to absorb them.

edit on 16-7-2015 by rexsblues because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 12:03 AM
link   
a reply to: [post=19580311]rexsblues[/post

My home state has been in transformation mode for the past 10-15 years, all efforts in concert to create a progressive utopia it seems. The current hot topics center on our largest city attaining sanctuary status, creating more bike lanes at the cost of mounting traffic, and the proliferation of guns and "gun violence". Incidents of reported shootings have increased, and gun deaths in the major metropolitan area have decreased. Gun crimes associated with gang violence, and the majority of these crimes being centered in the same areas are irrelevant to the local pols, as blame is placed solely on the tool used, guns.

I sometimes reflect on the time and energy I spend defending my position on gun ownership, and the value I place on the ability to protect my family using a variety of measures (alarm system, dog, training, research, etc.). To me, it's common sense to take these measures as police response is 10-15 minutes away.

Personally, I never understood why service members were not allowed to carry sidearms, as they receive comprehensive training on the handling and use of firearms. After Ft. Hood and WA Navy Yard, it only seems logical to revise policy to protect those who serve.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 01:19 AM
link   
a reply to: rexsblues

Some will take a principled stance. They will fight and die for freedom.

Some won't. They want to keep their pay checks and job security.

And some will stay neutral. They will just see how it all pans out in the end.

I don't know when it will happen but I know which one of those I am.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 03:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: rexsblues
Just now after the incident in Chattanooga, articles are popping everywhere now calling for an end to "gun free zones" for our military. Many people, naturally some who frequent this site are going to immediately try to exaggerate that term to tie in some conspiratorial theory around the Jade Helm exercise.

Just think before you do that, our military bases and public recruiting offices are the 'gun free zones' in question and yes that needs to change. There's no argument you can rationally make against that. This doesn't mean armed guards on every street corner or martial law.

The one thing that I've never really understood around the paranoid theories of the police state, is the simple fact that if it ever were to happen on the scale that is often imagined, the majority of the armed guards and patrols in America are going to be made up primarily of my kind of people, traditional Americans. These are the same people that aren't going to give up the same rights, many think they're out to take away.

That being said, anyone who may not feel like they don't necessarily identify with traditional America or it's values and are more inclined to the modern perspectives that are trying to redefine those values, ...it's time to either shut up or pack your bags, because your starting to scratch a very quiet, a very patient, a very sound, traditional and enforceful majority. And if a police state is what it's going to take to reestablish our traditional American values, well It's not our rights that will be infringed.

I know, I know, I can hear it now, "but that's what they want you to do!" "they want you to welcome this police state, if not demand it." "It's all part of the plan!" ...and to that I say, you've been drinkin way too much of your own koolaid. We're currently transcending the age of speculation regarding these issues and entering an era of actualization. It's time to pause and recess any old entertaining, fanciful, doom and gloom theories. Why would you be afraid of your friends and neighbors who take up these guarding patriotic roles to protect you? They're not going to take your guns, they're not going to take you're rights, they're going to defend them. Defend them from the radical proponents that are trying to absorb them.


that was the purpose of the whole thing. it was on the news in Australia this morning. Strange we never hear about road crashes in the US that claim 5 lives -I wonder why



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 05:10 AM
link   
a reply to: rexsblues

What do you mean by traditional American? The ones who believe that we should roll over and show our exposed under bellies to the government because it's for the greater good? That law enforcement is here to protect and serve (which is not their job anymore).

Ending gun free zones means that you would be ushering in military hubs into the U.S. That small town military recruiter would be pretty much on standby if there were any type of uprising. Military differs from police on the fact that they have to act out orders or repercussions will arise.

Say if there is an uprising against the government for whatever reason in America, the government will already have a foothold with multiple amounts of soldiers in each town. And you're allowing an armory for them. Combined with the police force and SWAT they would be able to eradicate any threat to them quickly. Leaving America in a sugar coated oppressive militaristic state.

They don't need to be on every corner in the modern age, they have cameras and drones for that now. It's not the 40s where you have to run to the areas phone booth to report a situation and call In backup.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 05:29 AM
link   
a reply to: rexsblues

Yea, right, its all good as long as: The one thing that I've never really understood around the paranoid theories of the police state, is the simple fact that if it ever were to happen on the scale that is often imagined, the majority of the armed guards and patrols in America are going to be made up primarily of my kind of people, traditional Americans. These are the same people that aren't going to give up the same rights, many think they're out to take away.

By 2030, that certainly won't be the case and it probably isn't the case today, we just don't see it.

So....I got an idea for ya' buddy. I'd suggest everyone better have their bags packed and at the ready for the bug out because when the day comes the SHTF and they have to call out the military to intervene in the chaos? Remember, pay backs are a biotch!



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 07:24 AM
link   
a reply to: rexsblues

I respectfully disagree with your alternative perspective



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 07:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Boscowashisnamo




Personally, I never understood why service members were not allowed to carry sidearms, as they receive comprehensive training on the handling and use of firearms.


During my great patriotic war everyone was armed due to sappers managing to get through the wire at night and slit throats or just out right kill G.I.s It worked fine until we had two enlisted guys kill themselves with their side arms.. One was playing Russian roulette with a revolver that the cylinder turned in the opposite direction from what he was used to; the other guy I don't remember only that they both were killed screwing around with the weapons needlessly in the same month or close to it. The Company commander said enough is enough so all side arms were taken from our enlisted guys.. They did keep their rifles though if they were issued one..

I remember guards at military airbases carrying M-16s with empty mags attacked.. Even in war it was mostly all for show.

In some cases you are dealing with young immature testosterone over loaded kids who have the bodies of young strong men and the maturity and reasoning ability of young teenagers.

I do believe every recruitment office should have at least one armed individual working during duty hours.

Probably should arm certain enlisted and officers on every base in every MOS. The M.P.s are armed but they tend to be like any police force which is minutes away when seconds count.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 08:16 AM
link   
a reply to: rexsblues

well i have to disagree with this.


our military bases and public recruiting offices are the 'gun free zones'


now public recruiting offices are yes i agree with that. but every military base i've ever been stationed on, or ever went to to do my job after i got out, have armed guard on the gates, and military police on patrol. just about all bases i have been on or visited have a reactionary force, that may or may not be military police but are for base security. in other words they don't do law enforcement only respond when a security breach is happening.

i would say that military bases are gun restricted zones, where only certain personal have weapons issued to them.

and i do agree with recruiting offices having armed security personal stationed at the entrance of the offices.



edit on 17-7-2015 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 01:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
Ending gun free zones means that you would be ushering in military hubs into the U.S. That small town military recruiter would be pretty much on standby if there were any type of uprising. Military differs from police on the fact that they have to act out orders or repercussions will arise.

Say if there is an uprising against the government for whatever reason in America, the government will already have a foothold with multiple amounts of soldiers in each town. And you're allowing an armory for them. Combined with the police force and SWAT they would be able to eradicate any threat to them quickly. Leaving America in a sugar coated oppressive militaristic state.

They don't need to be on every corner in the modern age, they have cameras and drones for that now.


- No, ending gun free zones means letting certain qualified officers on base other than MPs carry sidearms and letting a recruiting officer have a .45 in his desk.

- Again, on this 'every town' scale the soldiers would be comprised of... Americans, with strong feelings and emotional ties to their home and country, which negates this delusion.

- Exaclty, so what are you worried about?


originally posted by: TonyS
By 2030, that certainly won't be the case and it probably isn't the case today, we just don't see it.

So....I got an idea for ya' buddy. I'd suggest everyone better have their bags packed and at the ready for the bug out because when the day comes the SHTF and they have to call out the military to intervene in the chaos? Remember, pay backs are a biotch!


- Way ahead of ya, but what about this equates to SH'nTF?



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: rexsblues

Guess I made a leap there when you talked about paranoid theories about a police state. I'd think of a "police state" being invoked when the SHTF.

However, even in these more or less normal times, I can tell you with all certainty that there's a significant number of people I know at work who won't pull over for a cop even today. They instead drive slowly and carefully to the nearest police station. The reason for that is simple; you can easily buy old cop cruisers and they sell the uniforms and badges at the local flea market. There's at least 7 or 8 reports of crooks dressing up as cops to do easy access home invasions in my old home town.



posted on Jul, 17 2015 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: TonyS

Yeah, i heard about somethin like that happening a few months ago, really f'd up.

I know we've got police auctions every few months, old cruisers go pretty cheap.
edit on 17-7-2015 by rexsblues because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join