NRA Statement

[T-Roy]

I'm a soldier with many "personally owned firearms" many of them (most) are on the projected target list posted earlier today, and frankly, I would have deep moral issues with confiscating weapons from civilians, however, if we are ordered to do this we have to, regardless of oath's we've swore we still can be prosecuted under the UCMJ unless an order is immoral or unlawful. Bottom line, LEO's and Soldiers have to listen to the people who sign their paychecks.

I have a buddy who's career, and we had this conversation, which is what made me post the question. He's not sure what he'd do, and like you he would lose a lot of weapons. I don't know, it's strange days, and it looks like they're not over.

 

[mkdhotrod]

I have a buddy who's career, and we had this conversation, which is what made me post the question. He's not sure what he'd do, and like you he would lose a lot of weapons. I don't know, it's strange days, and it looks like they're not over.

I just brushed the events lately as typical events after a shooting, but things are escalating very quickly. I don't know what I would do either..

 

[T-Roy]

I just brushed the events lately as typical events after a shooting, but things are escalating very quickly. I don't know what I would do either..

It's hard to say if/when/what will actually happen. Of course us "firearms enthusiasts" are probably all over reacting to some degree, just like all the gun banners are. Plus, never underestimate the shortness of the American public's attention span....

On a completely different alarmist note, the Call of Duty server is unavailable, and I am hereby officially starting a rumor that it is because of the school shooting.

 

[mkdhotrod]

It's hard to say if/when/what will actually happen. Of course us "firearms enthusiasts" are probably all over reacting to some degree, just like all the gun banners are. Plus, never underestimate the shortness of the American public's attention span....

On a completely different alarmist note, the Call of Duty server is unavailable, and I am hereby officially starting a rumor that it is because of the school shooting.

Holy ****.... the world really is ending... not my black ops 2...

 

[Rommel]

I'm a soldier with many "personally owned firearms" many of them (most) are on the projected target list posted earlier today, and frankly, I would have deep moral issues with confiscating weapons from civilians, however, if we are ordered to do this we have to, regardless of oath's we've swore we still can be prosecuted under the UCMJ unless an order is immoral or unlawful. Bottom line, LEO's and Soldiers have to listen to the people who sign their paychecks.

First of all thank you for your service. Just curious as I'm trying to better understand what you are saying here. Are you stating that if ordered to do so (that is, without repeal or ratification of the 2nd i.e. Executive Priveledge) you would classify confiscating weapons not immoral or unlawful? Or are you saying that if such a law were passed which prohibited citizens from owning firearms you would then follow orders as it would then be lawful and just? I hope that makes sense.

 

[Bypass]

This ^

Sums it all, and its the best case scenerio for america. They need to look at other countries murder rates where all weapons are banned. They nearly double or triple the us. We dont need gun control. We need thoroughness, Everyone should be required to pass a mental health ( psychological ) like LEOs have to before being sworn, and only be able to buy a firearm with a permit ( based on if you pass the psych) Everything should be done before hand, so afterwards its like buying anything else when you go purchase a firearm ( Like it is) if you have a permit.

hope this makes sense. Ive have 2 hours of sleep

I am pretty sure the guy stole someone elses firearms to commit his crime..

 

[Lionheart]

I'm a soldier with many "personally owned firearms" many of them (most) are on the projected target list posted earlier today, and frankly, I would have deep moral issues with confiscating weapons from civilians, however, if we are ordered to do this we have to, regardless of oath's we've swore we still can be prosecuted under the UCMJ unless an order is immoral or unlawful. Bottom line, LEO's and Soldiers have to listen to the people who sign their paychecks.

I have read your post several times and reflected on it and I'm still confused. And troubled......

1) Are you saying that you would obey an order (with deep moral misgivings, but still obey) to confiscate firearms from civilians? If so, how far are you willing to go to obey that order? Shooting a grandmother to take her family shotgun? It's like the parting of two roads in the woods, they both may appear to go in parallel paths to the same destination but choosing the wrong one can lead you down a path that ends very far from the other.

2) I deeply respect and am grateful for all those who serve our country but they become my enemy when they are willing to obey an "order" for a "paycheck" because of threat of punishment by "superiors" under any uniform system of "justice". I hope your post was made without thinking through the outcome of a decision to "obey orders" that violate the precious 2nd amendment. Our forefathers died to give us the right to protect our families from tyranny. I know it sounds paranoid to bring this up but many German police and military offers offered logic similar to your post when being tried for atrocities. They had to obey orders.

I'm not calling you a Nazi and I'm not trying to insult you in any way.....just hoping you will think through this and decide where you will personally draw the line between lawful and unlawful orders....because I don't see how any confiscation order could ever be considered "lawful" or "moral". I don't think any amount of money or security should influence any LEO or soldier to "go along" with orders that tread on other's God-given rights, including the right of self-protection.

An earlier post said it well when quoting one of our forefathers about the danger of choosing security over liberty....

 

[rlt3241963]

I posted this a few day ago on a different thread. It is a statement made by a member of a Political Alternative Rock Band Called Stuck Mojo. They are kind of on the line of Rage Against The Machine. The statement was made shortly after 9-11.

[FONT=&amp]STUCK MOJO[/FONT]​

[FONT=&amp]Declaration Of A Headhunter[/FONT]​

[FONT=&amp]DECLARATION[/FONT][FONT=&amp]
(Rich Ward)[/FONT]​

[FONT=&amp]Events of recent history indicate that Americans are setting a course for the end of their own great nation. The ever growing trend in this country is to judge people, not by their individual character, but by their identity as a member of a specific group. No one has ever succeeded or failed in life as a result of their group affiliation. A person's success or failure is also not based on luck, but on the sum total of the decisions that they have made. Those who succeed do so through good work ethic and their wise use of their power to choose. The opposite is true for those who fail. The ideals of individual accountability and responsibility in the United States are dying everyday. A gun cannot be responsible for a death, just as a shovel cannot be responsible for digging a ditch. Both are only tools that have no will of their own. Responsibility is an adjunct through conscious choice and is the price we pay for freedom. Freedom is also a tool. It is an essential tool needed by human beings if they are to prosper, rather than to merely survive. Yet there are those who would rather trade their freedom for security. Some believe that it is the responsibility of government to provide for you. In truth, we form government to ensure and protect the freedom that is already inherently ours. [/FONT]

 

[sig68]

If it ever goes this far I'm for certain a paycheck will be the last thing your concerned with.

I'm a soldier with many "personally owned firearms" many of them (most) are on the projected target list posted earlier today, and frankly, I would have deep moral issues with confiscating weapons from civilians, however, if we are ordered to do this we have to, regardless of oath's we've swore we still can be prosecuted under the UCMJ unless an order is immoral or unlawful. Bottom line, LEO's and Soldiers have to listen to the people who sign their paychecks.

 

[dunkel]

I'm a soldier with many "personally owned firearms" many of them (most) are on the projected target list posted earlier today, and frankly, I would have deep moral issues with confiscating weapons from civilians, however, if we are ordered to do this we have to, regardless of oath's we've swore we still can be prosecuted under the UCMJ unless an order is immoral or unlawful. Bottom line, LEO's and Soldiers have to listen to the people who sign their paychecks.

Oh really? You wouldn't find anything "immoral or unlawful" about a law requiring you to confiscate guns from civilians?