A quick note to trolling gun nuts

[LuckyTheDog]

To those of you threatening armed rebellion if a new assault rile ban is implemented, please note: The U.S. military will turn you into a stain on the pavement within the first half hour of your "civil war." We all know it.

So just STFU and start saying something productive.

[SummerSnow]

1. You are so right

My question is...who are they going after in their armed rebellion?

[kestrel91316]

39. Liberals, minorities (brown people), heretics (anyone not a christian fundie), and anyone

who objects to their plans.

[U235]

2. If you think the US military would turn on American citizens, you obviously never served in it.

[Puzzledtraveller]

3. You got that right.

[XRubicon]

12. All enemies foreign or domestic

I seem to remember those words in the oath I took. Has the oath been changed?

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

[HangOnKids]

14. That poster appears Puzzled!

[U235]

21. It's the same oath I took and I'm pretty sure the Bill of Rights is still part of it.

[XRubicon]

23. So did you understand what you swore to?

I think you need to think it over.

[billh58]

35. It wouldn't necessarily take the

military Einstein. The local and Federal police arrest and shoot at (if they are forced to) and kill criminals every day. And don't make the mistake of believing that those in the military would support an armed insurrection by a bunch of 2nd Amendment NRA yahoos with dented F-150s and AR-15s.

And yes, I served and would have upheld my oath to oppose ALL enemies of the United States, including the home grown type.

[Bandit]

7. Ever heard of Kent State or Jackson State?

There has been several times in our nation's history when the US Military was used to quell riots and or protests. During the late sixties the military was often used at University Protests....

[U235]

18. Minimally trained weekend warriors. A completely different situation than asking troops to

invade private homes to confiscate weapons. Why is it the Democrats here are horrified with police activities that routinely violate the rights of citizens but will gladly give them or the military essential carte blanche to fuck with people if it involves guns? It makes no sense.

[groundloop]

24. I don't recall any posts backing your claims

Where has anyone on DU suggested it's ok for the military to "fuck with people" in regards to guns?

We've suggested several things, mostly having to do with registration requirements and common sense limitations to what is legal to own. I believe you're mistaken.

[October]

28. Really! What is that 'guy' talking about??? Way to put words in people's mouths...

[October]

30. No one said any such thing.

That is so far off the mark, and rings of total paranoia.

[malaise]

33. Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

These folks were born last week

[Hekate]

8. Tell that to the unarmed dead kids at Kent State. Tell that to the armed Rebels of the Civil War.

Or are you historically challenged?

All the kids at Kent State were doing was peacefully protesting a war, and none of them was armed.

What do you think the US military would be ordered to do if an armed rebellion were to actually break out in the here and now?

[Scuba]

11. Um, I've served. I've also heard of Kent State.

[azurnoir]

15. Isn't the National Guard part of the US military? n/t

[busterbrown]

16. Does the National Guard fall under auspices of U.S. Military..?

Perhaps you mean if a right wing tea bagging fundamentalist extremists is in the ranks..He would
never shoot at one of his comrades!

[doc03]

26. They do what they are told, ever see the movie Matewan, ever hear

of Kent State?

[ellisonz]

29. Please turn your textbook to Chapter 10: The American Civil War.

Thank You!

[Hoyt]

31. Right wingers might not turn on right wing compound dwellers, but the

military and their supporters include a lot of people who don't see those kind of hate and para-military types as "American."

[ThoughtCriminal]

40. Every heard of the Bonus Army?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army

Need more examples?

[pasto76]

42. holy shit are YOU wrong

I would absolutely put down armed insurrection by american citizens. ESPECIALLY if they were endangering any citizen who was not involved.

Maybe you missed this part, but we already fought a war about 'seceding', and the secessionists LOST. Maybe you missed the part where if you dont like the american government, you VOTE them out of office.

and as noted by another response to you, I think you MISSED THE PART where you SWORE YOUR OATH. you should re-read it again.

any one of these lunatics band together and try to take ANYTHING by armed force, if the police cant handle them, a platoon of my combat hardened veterans will make light work of it.

I dont know what "military" you served in, but we serve the country, not violent seditionist gun nuts.

[obama2terms]

43. Wouldn't they be forced

to if they started harming innocent people?

[Generic Brad]

45. So you're saying it's all right for American citizens to murder other American citizens?

Just trying to get some clarity on where you stand.

[Herlong]

48. I have served in the military

And I don't get your point.

[Herlong]

50. Hang on U235

Where did you serve and how long?

Me, Germany, Desert Storm and still going strong.

And I don't roll my eyes at anything!

[SCantiGOP]

52. Go away

You seriously contend the US military wouldn't follow orders to put down a treasonous attack by private militias on the US government? Must be nice to have your own reality.

[SCantiGOP]

53. the reason he only got 3 posts in.....

"Posting privileges revoked"

[jody]

4. Right on! Are you in the military already or do you plan to volunteer tomorrow? nt

[LuckyTheDog]

10. Not sure what that's supposed to mean.

But, nobody here ought to defending the gun nuts and their "revolution" fantasies.

The gun nuts at Tactical Response or in the militia movement have nothing at all in common with the Continental Army. They are not patriots. The U.S. revolution was organized by local civil authorities and was kept under civilian control the whole time. The militia movement has a lot more in common with the Mafia than with George Washington's crew.

[jody]

13. If you are male between 17-45 you're in the militia. In some states its all sexes 17-64. In case you

didn't know that.

[pasto76]

44. no, you arent

"well regulated" militia. Means you actually have to be trained.

registering for the selective service is NOT signing up for any 'militia'. Have you sworn in? know where to report?

selective service is just a database so they CAN draft you if they need you. Draft being the operative word.

[jody]

46. See 10 USC § 311 - Militia: composition and classes

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/search/display.html?terms=militia&url=/uscode/html/uscode10/usc_sec_10_00000311----000-.html

Depending on your state's own definition of militia, you could be part of its unorganized militia.

One state includes both male and female 17 to 64.

I've grown weary of telling so many DUers about militias.

[cthulu2016]

5. Is the OP an example of "saying something productive"

It appears to be a grotesque empowerment fantasy concerning the physical annihilation of one's enemies... but perhaps there's a nuance I missed.

[mokawanis]

19. I think the poster

is probably just tired of hearing gun nuts shriek about what they're gonna do if any gun control legislation is passed. Guys like James Yeager who stated he's willing to fire the first shot and start killing people.

[jmg257]

38. Maybe not exactly productive (unless listened to) but certainly plausible. Nt

[galileoreloaded]

6. So, yeah. They ARE the gun nuts by and large.

Our cognitive skills are fading quickly on this issue.

[0rganism]

20. something don't smell quite right here

"I know that there's many others who can't wait to {turn in my own family when the time comes to shut them up}"

Really? can you name anyone? even one person who'd eagerly "turn in" their family? I doubt this description applies to "many others", as doing something like this with alacrity is peculiarly cold. Perhaps you'd like to rephrase, try again.

[Puha Ekapi]

25. Blatant...

...trolling IMO.

[patrice]

27. I'm going to go for PATHETICALLY transparent. Pitifull, actually. nt

[0rganism]

36. true but we aren't supposed to call it out directly

+ was kind of hoping the bridgedweller could be cajoled into making further asinine remarks..

[Dalai_1]

17. Kick n/t

[davidn3600]

22. Revolution by them is not what concerns me. It's assassination attempts that concern me.

These people talking about violence are not going to start shooting at tanks or SWAT teams or even the police. They will start shooting at public officials.

[Hoyt]

34. Exactly. And a lot of innocent folks will get hurt.

[patrice]

32. I'd like to see whether there are corelations between gun nuts and opposition to

funding APPROPRIATE law enforcement and first responders.

Not all police are rights abusers, but for some reason we are supposed to think that they are.

[MindandSoul]

37. Absolutely! But what is even more ironic is this:

It seems that it is precisely the same people (Republicans) who continue to advocate for a "STRONG Military" and therefore has assured that our military forces were second to none and could turn just about any country in a dead zone (if the President in charge decided to use the maximum force), who NOW think that they could "overthrow" that "second to none" military force that THEY have build to assure that NO ONE, any place in the world, could "overthrow" it!

And NOW they think they're going to "revolt" against that military supremacy that THEY have created with. . .semi-automatic weapons and a hand guns?

DUH!

[geckosfeet]

41. No one here has threatened armed rebellion. Stop pretending that they have.

[Lizzie Poppet]

47. Oh, it's THIS thread again.

[meow2u3]

49. I'd call them what they really are--armed insurrectionists

In other words, traitors to the United States, a.k.a., domestic enemies.

[Kalidurga]

51. They get so mad...

when I call their weapons pea shooters that don't have a chance against drones or even the ATF if they are called to disarm them.

[MineralMan]

54. Yah, for those threatening armed rebellion,

I'd like to introduce you to Mr. Hellfire:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-114_Hellfire

So much for your militia bunker.