This is an interesting article and illustrative of what I think is a very different atmosphere in the US today.
At first glance, those of us with a preference for liberty over equality could have a visceral reaction to the story. Frankly, I think it was just a clumsy mistake. There's no question that lots of turnover in a unit with a mission that could put them in Iraq or Afghanistan in short order unquestionably mandates the kind of training the article discusses. Alas, how they went about it initially was, well, assuming the paper's accounting is accurate, not the best of brainstorming sessions.
Of course, it's easy to see how "searching for and apprehending a suspected weapons dealer," in a local neighborhood no less, can push certain buttons. The left may poo poo the skyrocketing arms and ammunition sales as needless overreaction to the election of America's demonstrably and unabashedly left-wing president but his campaign statements had an effect on many citizens...and not in a good way.
The listeners he prompted to go out and buy more guns 'n' ammo are the kind who are more prone than most liberals to take another person at his word. Then the Guard tries to do something that, to the Guard, makes sense readiness-wise but ended up being the planning equivalent of breakdancing in a field of cow manure. Lots of cleanup required and very few constructive results.
Anyway...
What struck me as interesting is:
1) I'm in the process of applying for a Federal Firearms License. It makes me think now that I will be highlighting myself unnecessarily, making my person and property more vulnerable to the power and coercion of the state. Maybe I'm overreacting but given the hostility the Administration has to those who want to own firearms, much less sell them, it gives me pause. I guess that's the effect they're looking for.
2) The Guard, in its state role, is not a federal entity...and I think the paper isn't clear enough about this. The point is, many Guardsmen are now highly experienced soldiers--warriors--who are now perfectly capable--and legal--in being the "muscle" behind an aggressive police force in small-town America. (I say "small-town America" because I think that's where most Administration officials feel the problem is greatest...with its high concentration of fly-over State bumpkins and a gun possession per capita is highest.) If the government decides, through the courts, that the Second Amendment means militia and militia only, then the confiscation process will begin in earnest and citizens will be hard-pressed to resist if the police tasked to do so are backed up by guys in full battle rattle and armed with fully automatic assault weapons with experience in Haditha, Ramadi, Baghdad and Kabul. As long as they aren't federalized, the Posse Comitatus provisions are moot. So, anyone thinking that Obama will never be able to disarm you, think again, the state governors who will have to comply with federal law will be backed by Guardsmen with firepower that dwarfs yours.
3) There were a number of mistakes made by everyone involved in the article. I had a sense of "there but for the grace of God, go I" when reading about how this thing got going--with the best of intentions. You're a commander who wants your troops well-trained and you aren't going to Ft Polk anytime soon to get some quality MOOTW training so let's see what I can do locally on our current budget...I get it; I sympathize. Then there's the buffoon who threatened the town with 5,500 militiamen from North Dakota. Sprinkle in a little high dudgeon from the paper's editors about the principally out-of-state main source of protest and a talk show host's handling of their original article and off we go.
But ask yourself why this thing sort of blew up in the Guard's face. Answer's fairly obvious. The American people aren't as stupid as many on the Left think them, or want them, to be. They can smell BS at a fairly extended range. The reaction to this whole thing says there are a lot of folks out there who think their own government is slowly becoming more of a threat than it's been in a while. They may be right. And that's what worries me a little.
I'd welcome your thoughts...
At first glance, those of us with a preference for liberty over equality could have a visceral reaction to the story. Frankly, I think it was just a clumsy mistake. There's no question that lots of turnover in a unit with a mission that could put them in Iraq or Afghanistan in short order unquestionably mandates the kind of training the article discusses. Alas, how they went about it initially was, well, assuming the paper's accounting is accurate, not the best of brainstorming sessions.
Of course, it's easy to see how "searching for and apprehending a suspected weapons dealer," in a local neighborhood no less, can push certain buttons. The left may poo poo the skyrocketing arms and ammunition sales as needless overreaction to the election of America's demonstrably and unabashedly left-wing president but his campaign statements had an effect on many citizens...and not in a good way.
The listeners he prompted to go out and buy more guns 'n' ammo are the kind who are more prone than most liberals to take another person at his word. Then the Guard tries to do something that, to the Guard, makes sense readiness-wise but ended up being the planning equivalent of breakdancing in a field of cow manure. Lots of cleanup required and very few constructive results.
Anyway...
What struck me as interesting is:
1) I'm in the process of applying for a Federal Firearms License. It makes me think now that I will be highlighting myself unnecessarily, making my person and property more vulnerable to the power and coercion of the state. Maybe I'm overreacting but given the hostility the Administration has to those who want to own firearms, much less sell them, it gives me pause. I guess that's the effect they're looking for.
2) The Guard, in its state role, is not a federal entity...and I think the paper isn't clear enough about this. The point is, many Guardsmen are now highly experienced soldiers--warriors--who are now perfectly capable--and legal--in being the "muscle" behind an aggressive police force in small-town America. (I say "small-town America" because I think that's where most Administration officials feel the problem is greatest...with its high concentration of fly-over State bumpkins and a gun possession per capita is highest.) If the government decides, through the courts, that the Second Amendment means militia and militia only, then the confiscation process will begin in earnest and citizens will be hard-pressed to resist if the police tasked to do so are backed up by guys in full battle rattle and armed with fully automatic assault weapons with experience in Haditha, Ramadi, Baghdad and Kabul. As long as they aren't federalized, the Posse Comitatus provisions are moot. So, anyone thinking that Obama will never be able to disarm you, think again, the state governors who will have to comply with federal law will be backed by Guardsmen with firepower that dwarfs yours.
3) There were a number of mistakes made by everyone involved in the article. I had a sense of "there but for the grace of God, go I" when reading about how this thing got going--with the best of intentions. You're a commander who wants your troops well-trained and you aren't going to Ft Polk anytime soon to get some quality MOOTW training so let's see what I can do locally on our current budget...I get it; I sympathize. Then there's the buffoon who threatened the town with 5,500 militiamen from North Dakota. Sprinkle in a little high dudgeon from the paper's editors about the principally out-of-state main source of protest and a talk show host's handling of their original article and off we go.
But ask yourself why this thing sort of blew up in the Guard's face. Answer's fairly obvious. The American people aren't as stupid as many on the Left think them, or want them, to be. They can smell BS at a fairly extended range. The reaction to this whole thing says there are a lot of folks out there who think their own government is slowly becoming more of a threat than it's been in a while. They may be right. And that's what worries me a little.
I'd welcome your thoughts...
Mostly on the disarming...
My personal opinion is that it's fairly obvious that President Obama would like nothing more than to make over this country into some sort of European Socialist Utopia. While very difficult at best to accomplish with our seperation of powers, it doesn't mean he won't try. And, disarming the population would be one of the first priorities in his mind.
I think, however, that he has already overreached, and the inevitable pushback is already beginning. You know, as I saw the election unfolding, I tried not to worry a lot, because, hey, how much damage can a fellow do in two years? (Two years being the point where the opposition picks up enough ground in Congress to at least put up a decent fight) Now I really wonder how much damage will be done. In the long run, we may get some sort of watered-down "assault weapons" legislation, but even that is looking like a slim possibility now. Especially with all the new gun owners out there now, thanks to Obama himself ironically.
All that being said, I strongly believe in the 2nd Amendment. And often recite the bumper stickers, Cold Dead Hands, Take my guns, but they will have to take the bullets first, etc. However, what would *I* do if law enforcement, not even counting heavily armed Gaurdsmen, showed up and wanted mine? The last thing I would ever *WANT* to do is use my firearms, if I actually had any, in that fashion. I'm also not crazy about the idea of going to prison. If I were to theoretically 'make a stand,' and such, you would be reading about a dead domestic terrorist who fired on law enforcement as they investigated an illegal weapons cache. So that's out too. No real choices, and none of them good.
Now, back in the real world, how many National Gaurdsmen, or police officers for that matter, would willingly and enthusiatically carry out orders like that? There would be a large number that would refuse, I'm sure. Maybe not enough to stop it, but enough to make a stink.
As for the exercise in Arcadia, well, I think it was probably an innocent enough exercise, with no ill will intended. Blown way out of proportion, which is Jones' specialty, as he is very good at taking bits of truth and stringing them together with amazing leaps of logic based on his own "truth." But, it is a bit of a 'hmmm' moment, giving us pause, food for thought, and What If exercises.
I wonder, how many REAL Republican governors (not including fake Republicans like Charlie Crist) would actually go along with it? Governors "will have to comply with federal law" as you say, but if they understand that the federal law violates the Constitution, and furthermore threatens the very freedom of our country, will they really go for it? Governors aren't part of the federal government, they don't have offices in DC or get their paychecks signed by the President's Treasury department. Even in these dark, centralized, authoritarian days, they still have a measure of independence from the Feds. I dare say Sarah Palin wouldn't order the Guard out to collect Alaskans' rifles.
Sadly, now that Jeb is gone, we here in Florida would have the Guardsmen breaking down the doors in no time. In a situation like that, what DO you do? I don't see any use in "making a stand" either, when it's just going to get you killed and reported as some sort of terrorist...and even if, somehow, you let loose on the authorities and fought them off, (maybe you live in a fortress with M2 HMG emplacements? I dunno...) so what? You've just gone and killed a bunch of American servicemen. Great, now we're doing our enemies' jobs for them. On the other hand, do you just hand over your firearms like a good little subject? Then what do you do when they ask for the rest of your rights? You've already given away the one that's supposed to help you secure the others, and more importantly, you've set the precedent anyway. So what's left? Bury your Mossberg in the back yard? Wait for better days, or until you can organize a massive demonstration with armed civil disobedience?
I'm really not sure what the right thing to do is, if the Obamessiah decides that the Constitution needs some Change.
That said, the Kansas National Guard is welcome to set up a TOC at my place if they want to do a little "Defense of Eastern Kansas Against Those Damn Missourians" exercise.
I suspect if they did a "cordon and search" exercise at my place it would turn into a historical weapons shoot. Which means they better bring some ammo with 'em. I've got the barbecue and brats.
I dunno what the rules are when they aren't in Federal status, but I'll be having a beer or two, as well.
*That's* why it blew up in the Guard's face.
One that will probably just get me in trouble. And not with the government.
Traitor!
Next you'll be worshipping at the alter of Colonel Lane.... (Crappy BBQ btw)
I'll inform Quantrill that a Jim Brown sycophant is in a (well-armed) residence next time Lawrence needs burning... which come to think of it... is just about every day.
Keep your Redlegs, you scallywag! They gave the term a bad name...
As for sacking Lawrence, you can find your torches over by the barn. Jayhawks are still legal game birds at Castle Argghhh!
Heh. There really is some fractured history in that last comment...
Imagine doing that today. Nowadays we seem to hide our training at remote sites away from nosy citizens, and hire contractors to play the roles of auxiliaries or indigenous Host Nation personnel.
With the ascent to power of our new Commander-in-Chief and his Attorney General, those of us old enough to have been politically aware in those days remember Waco, Elian Gonzalez, Oklahoma City, Wayne Lapierre's "Jack Booted Thugs" and Bush 41's histrionics over that. Since those days, law enforcement at all levels has become even more militarized, with more fully automatic weapons, armored vehicles, very long range large caliber precision rifles, all financed through asset forfeiture and other spoils of the War on Drugs. And since those days we have trained up hundreds of thousands of door kickers who, viewed from an insurgent's perspective, were no slouches in jack booted thuggery themselves.
Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
Be honest with yourself. They don't call it the painful truth for nothing.
And remember, the bloody-mindedest loud mouth at the meeting is always the FBI informant.
8^ )
Actually, Dusty, I got halfway thru that and got fed up. This whole 'Red State America Under Seige' mentality is flat out stupid, and getting agrivating. A bunch of folks riled up listening to talk radio doesn't sound to me to be a sign of American intelligence. (I know some true MENSA types who listen to that stuff and come up with some VERY warped ideas of what the world looks like, and, yeah, that's an assumption I'm working with.)
Tempest in a teapot, actually. Guard unit asks for volunteers, right wing scaremonger(hey, his financial success is dependent upon making people scared and upset, kinda like Al Sharpton) totally blows it out of proportion and intentionally misrepresents it, and from this you get to 'they're gonna grab my guns! Man the ramparts!'? To steal a line from Jonah, you stole an intellectual base to many for me to follow, homes. And I disagree totally on this being evidence of Joe Schmoe being able to sniff out the BS, if it was it woulda been people doing a double take when they read the headline and looking for two more confirming reports. Instead we got knee jerk, and that is really starting to bug me.
I was happy when that MN Militia crap became passe. I dont wanna see it come back. That kind of paranoia is unhealthy.
I mean, really, we're gonna have our expression of Leftard paranoia, but instead of wanting to make new nations called Pacifica(to balance out Jesusland) we're going down the 'we'll wage war against the gun grabbers'? People gotta get a grip and turn off the Hannity.
Heh, and #4, you left out Ruby Ridge, homes. And, you're citing OKC, a moment of whackado 'Muricans lost in some serious paranoia as something in you're favor here? Okay, I don't get it. Please explain. That just seems bass ackwards to me.
Really, some of us need to stop acting like we're the peasants in Monty Python and the Holy Grail with the constant protestations of being oppressed.
I also think that if it does come to that door knock the US is already lost because it means the majority of people are aligned to allow such a thing to happen and that means those values of America are already lost before the attempt to grab your guns.
Some goob sold a national audience on this and had nutjobs calling in from CA to bring protestors. That does not speak well of avg US intelligence.
DUH-they elected Obama, didn't they?
For you to construe from the above sentence that I am or was "in favor" of OKC indicates to me that you have allowed your drama queeniness to becloud your comprehension, ry.
And why bother to explain anything to you? You'll just get fed up.
I remember Ruby Ridge, ry. H-S Precision won't let me forget.