1,100 Green Berets Sign Letter Condemning Gun Control

page: 2
17
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by abeverage

That is actually my point I honestly think this is all a charade played by Gun manufactures to increase sales. There are far to many gun owners for a gun grab so why not make tons of cash after a horrible incident.

There is a bunch of sabre rattling but when it comes to down to what was accomplished the consumer again lost out and lined the pockets of the Rich.


Seems an unnecessary tactic. Sales of firearms and firearm components were already sitting at record levels for years before the politicians started talking about banning this and that.




posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by abeverage

That is actually my point I honestly think this is all a charade played by Gun manufactures to increase sales. There are far to many gun owners for a gun grab so why not make tons of cash after a horrible incident.

There is a bunch of sabre rattling but when it comes to down to what was accomplished the consumer again lost out and lined the pockets of the Rich.


Seems an unnecessary tactic. Sales of firearms and firearm components were already sitting at record levels for years before the politicians started talking about banning this and that.


They are most certainly taking advantage of the situation anyone buying a gun right now is like people buying houses in 2007 oh...wait...

But now that makes me wonder how you would do speculation in Guns or if there will come a bust pretty soon!


CX

posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by T4NG0
I have a feeling the green berets will be ok
Here is an Army shooter here.



*Note to the administration.....THIS is the only kind of gun control law abiding gun owners want.*


Very impressive shooting there.


CX.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 03:58 PM
link   
I dont see the military court marshalling teams of army green berets, or navy seals, or any of their highly trained special forces units for not obeying an order to disarm american citizens. Not only do i not see commanding officers making the call to send them to court marshall, i dont see special forces officers agreeing to that sort of order in the first place. I mean they are the most highly trained force on the planet, i think when they are involved in an operation their input is taken into consideration.

How much does it cost to train a special forces operator?

How do you replace an experienced team leader?

If one of the operators disobeys an order, does the team leader cover his ass?
edit on 30-1-2013 by onequestion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Think of it this way...

If these magazine restrictions get passed, a customer will have to buy 3, ten round magazines instead of just one 30 round magazine. I'm sure they make more money selling more 10 round magazines...



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


Possibly.

During the last AWB I dont recall anyone buying 10 round mags. Everyone's money was going into pre-ban mags. Sales that mostly benefited private individuals and not retailers or manufactures.

Even today in states like CA and MA the hot items are pre-ban mags and rebuild kits. Nobody wants to buy a 10 rounder if they can help it.

Maybe in like 50-100 years when all the 30 rounders stop circulating they'll sell more 10 round mags.
edit on 30-1-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaTroof
Good thing Green Berets don't make or interpret the laws.

If they fail to enforce the law, they are susceptible to dishonorable discharge.

Before you take an Oath, know what it says.


God I wish we did…at least I’d trust the men with whom I’ve served before some shyster lawyer from Chicago…it’s like a bad joke in the White House.

As a retired SF Officer; I have never really doubted the side the community would choose during any attempt at tyranny. The motto is De Oppreso Liber (to free the oppressed). I never joined the Oathkeepers when I was on active duty because that would be the first place they would look to begin a purge ala Stalin. They don't teach us how to infiltrate and survive to be stupid. The best way to prevent something like that will be from the inside...won't do to get purged. You'll be out of the loop and not see it coming.

Most of the people who signed that are Retirees or people no longer on active duty. Some of the more adventurous, either near retirement, the single or those whose kids are at the age of majority with little to lose for making a statement might have signed it.

Regarding risking dishonorable discharge and following orders.

All Army Officers take an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.

In view of that oath Officers are expected and required to weigh all orders against the Constitution as a matter of duty.

It is enlisted Soldiers who take an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic as well as to obey the orders of the Officers appointed over them and the orders of the POTUS.

It is every Officer's duty to question his orders through the prism of the Constitution and legality under the UCMJ.

That is why every Officer in Command of unit has either access to (Company Grade) or if it’s a Field Grade command he has a lawyer on his personal staff - the higher the level the more ambiguous the orders and the more legal staff one has to tackle the issues. The most important part of the Deliberate Military Decision Making Process is to test the legality of the plan/order. Whole staffs of people do nothing but that. In the end it is the Officers decision and his alone to either comply or reject the order as unlawful. Understanding the risk if you are wrong is very high.


edit on 30/1/2013 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 07:44 PM
link   
I'll just post this oner more time to emphasize the postivie aspects of gun control. The video speaks for itself. However, I need to point out that J.M. can shave a second off the time if it's not in competition siplmy because he can have a reload in hand before emptying the prior load.

Jerry Miculek video 12 shots in less than 3 seconds with a revolver


ganjoa



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaTroof
Good thing Green Berets don't make or interpret the laws.

If they fail to enforce the law, they are susceptible to dishonorable discharge.

Before you take an Oath, know what it says.

You're saying for green berets to know what the oath says.........

Wow, I don't even know what to say other than you're an idiot IMHO



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 08:34 PM
link   
this is as useful as 1000 alcoholics condemning liquor taxes!



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
this is as useful as 1000 alcoholics condemning liquor taxes!


Oh, do tell us all how members of one of the world's premier Special Forces Organization defending the Constitution is analogous to alcoholics combating liquor taxes? This should be good.


You have no clue what it takes to serve in this unit do you?



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 


Neither they nor you get to decie what constitutes "defending the constitution" - the Supreme court does.

And the supreme court has previously determined that limits on types of fire arms is constitutional.

When members of the armed forces take it upon themselves to do so then they are setting themselves up against the Supreme court that is not patriotism - that is treason.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


There is nothing treasonous about them telling the truth. There is nothing treasonous about them restating their oath to the Constitution.



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 10:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by Golf66
 


Neither they nor you get to decie what constitutes "defending the constitution" - the Supreme court does.

And the supreme court has previously determined that limits on types of fire arms is constitutional.

When members of the armed forces take it upon themselves to do so then they are setting themselves up against the Supreme court that is not patriotism - that is treason.


Second point you made is moot

As long as an officer is not in violation of article 88 of the UCMJ, It is their duty to Disobey all unlawful, immoral, and unethical orders.

How one defines that though, is up to the individual. Hence why we have Legal teams for Commanders, as Golf66 stated.

In the end you [Commander] stick to your decision; right, wrong , or indifferent.
edit on 30-1-2013 by J.B. Aloha because: Expound



posted on Jan, 30 2013 @ 10:56 PM
link   
reply to post by J.B. Aloha
 

OUTSTANDING point and I wish I could star you twice.

In many militaries around the world the recruits are trained that if they disobey an order they risk being shot. In some, it's not even termed a risk and still others have outright proven the point over the years in rather unforgettable ways.

In the United States military they are trained to follow orders UNLESS ..... and then given a very strict, very set and very unforgiving set of narrow exceptions. God Help the man or woman who makes that call and gets it WRONG and it's why we see so very few ever attempt it, in my view. That is how it should be.

That is also what makes our military, at the level of the people who staff it, the best fighting force in the world in this American's not so humble opinion.



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 06:28 AM
link   
Well what do you expect people in the army to do?

People who are drawn to the arm and especially special forces have a interest in guns and action and would most likely be gun enthusiasts.

We had a shooting in Australia were 45 people were killed by a lone gun man with an assault rifle, all such weapons were bought back by the government and we are better off for it to. Really don't understand why some countries have this morbid fascination with guns.



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
"Fighting soldiers from the sky"
"Fearless men who jump and die"
"Men who mean just what they say"
"The brave men of the Green Beret"

First Stanza, The Ballad of the Green Berets, SSgt Barry Sadler


There's a funnier version we used to sing involving pink berets and dadt.

Not sure its ats safe though.



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 08:29 AM
link   
The sacred Constitution and the Military Oath is VERY CLEAR, with nothing to argue about.

When an elected representative gets into office, he makes an OATH to defend the Constitution. So too the military officials.

Right now, the issue is the 2nd Amendment - A very CLEAR law with no ambiguites.

Those who are calling for the DELETION, or even INFRINGING upon the 2nd Amendment, HAD BROKEN THEIR OATH AND LAW, AND THEY ARE CRIMINALS!

So why should honest and law abidding citizens OBEY criminals, such as those sitting in the state govt in Chicago and New York, who had taken away guns for protection against criminals, but HAD NOT remove violence at all by the insane and the criminals who are now safely targetting citizens, for they know citizens had no guns now?

What had SCOTUS done, that they had allowed criminals to rule the states?



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 08:35 AM
link   
So it's, Army guys like guns, this comes a quite a surprise to me.

My god



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 





this is as useful as 1000 alcoholics condemning liquor taxes!


Although I do disagree with the analogy you have used I do agree with the sentiment of your post.

Of course military types are going to be against any change to gun laws, I am actually shocked it is as low as this only an 1100 serving and former members not very much really. They don’t actually make any difference to the debate or are going to change anything they are just doing what everyone else is doing, moaning about the changes to gun laws.

What they have to say does not make any differance






top topics



 
17
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join