wat?! martial law?! tinfoils were right?! [Archive]

Everto

12-20-2008, 06:31 AM

wat is this nonsense:

"The Morongo Basin office of the California Highway Patrol (CHP) in conjunction with the San Bernardino County Sheriffs Department and USMC Military Police, will conduct a joint sobriety/driver license checkpoint on Friday, December 12, 2008, somewhere in the uncorporated/incorporated area of San Bernardino County.

"All too often, members of our community are senselessly injured or killed on local roadways by intoxicated of unlicensed drivers," said Lieutenant Todd Sturges, Morongo Basin Area Commander. The goal of the CHP is to ensure the safe passage of each and every motorist by targeting roads where there is a high frequency of intoxicated or unlicensed drivers. A sobriety/driver license checkpoint is a proven tool for achieving this goal and is designed to augment existing patrol operations. "By publicizing our efforts we believe that we can detour motorists from driving under the influence and or/unlicensed," Lieutenant Sturges said

Lieutenant Sturges emphasized, "traffic volume permitting, all vehicles will be checked for drivers who are under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs or driving unlicensed. Our objective is to send a clear message to those individuals that break the law. The CHP will be keeping a close eye out for you."

NOTE: The sobriety/driver license checkpoint will be operated from 9:00 PM - 2:30 AM. The media may contact the Barstow Dispatch Center (760) 255-8700 on December 12, 2008, after 7:00 PM, for the exact location of the checkpoint.

It's not the fact this already happened, it's the fact that this did happen.

link:
http://campaignforliberty.com/wire.php?view=1115

Razel

12-20-2008, 06:33 AM

welcome to america

Spart

12-20-2008, 06:42 AM

I'm sorry, what is the problem here?

Everto

12-20-2008, 06:44 AM

I'm sorry, what is the problem here?

you're in Aussieland, your country was made by the same criminals destroyin' ours.

Spart

12-20-2008, 06:45 AM

you're in Aussieland, your country was made by the same criminals destroyin' ours.

Good reply, but it still doesn't answer the question. I'm sorry your government has the sheer gall to attempt to enforce the laws they have put into place (in this case, laws which very obviously are for your own good).

Ungraylessness

12-20-2008, 06:48 AM

Everto

12-20-2008, 06:48 AM

Good reply, but it still doesn't answer the question. I'm sorry your government has the sheer gall to attempt to enforce the laws they have put into place (in this case, laws which very obviously are for your own good).

To enforce this law, they're breaking another.

Originally placed in the consititution, Military troops aren't allowed to police our state unless nationally declared "Police State" or the ever so popular "Martial Law".

However, neither of which have been declared.
Yay for stopping drunk drivers, but I don't approve of it illegally.

Rhade

12-20-2008, 06:55 AM

To enforce this law, they're breaking another.

Originally placed in the consititution, Military troops aren't allowed to police our state unless nationally declared "Police State" or the ever so popular "Martial Law".

However, neither of which have been declared.
Yay for stopping drunk drivers, but I don't approve of it illegally.

/thread

kiasta

12-20-2008, 06:59 AM

wat is this nonsense:

It's not the fact this already happened, it's the fact that this did happen.

link:
http://campaignforliberty.com/wire.php?view=1115

This is even more fucked up...especially considering they are trying to convict that little girl for assault on a police officer?? Fucking pigs I swear to god I hate this country so much.

*Edit* Linkage would be nice I guess...

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=6436

Everto

12-20-2008, 07:06 AM

Nevron

12-20-2008, 07:08 AM

It's possible that due to there being two military bases in that county that it's a joint CP allowing the MPs to handle and deal with military personnel to ease some of the strain.

I'm not saying it's right, but maybe their intent isn't as tin-foil confirming as some of you are quickly concluding.

kiasta

12-20-2008, 07:08 AM

Let's go to Madagascar! :)

Lets do it!

Thoric

12-20-2008, 07:35 AM

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=6436

That's more messed up than some stuff in South Park.

Holy crap.

Desperado[1G]

12-20-2008, 07:37 AM

The number of DUI-related deaths must be pretty out of control if they are resorting to this.

I'd like to hear the other side, and see some numbers before /tinfoiling

alhazred

12-20-2008, 07:42 AM

wat is this nonsense:

It's not the fact this already happened, it's the fact that this did happen.

link:
http://campaignforliberty.com/wire.php?view=1115

didnt you hear about when the national guard after katrina stormed private houses with guns drawn and took guns from law abiding citizens with out provocation?

Ozzy Wrong

12-20-2008, 07:53 AM

;2170799']The number of DUI-related deaths must be pretty out of control if they are resorting to this.

I'd like to hear the other side, and see some numbers before /tinfoiling

I'm sure the other side is to drunk to formulate a coherent response.

Toxic Waste

12-20-2008, 07:54 AM

Tinfoils were right?

Damn, I'm always right. You people should know that by now.

Everto

12-20-2008, 08:08 AM

didnt you hear about when the national guard after katrina stormed private houses with guns drawn and took guns from law abiding citizens with out provocation?

Who cares about Florida? They were fucked since they were proclaimed a state. Flo - Rida, that's just dumb.

And I only care about this since California is my state.

Go wolverines?

Apex Vertigo

12-20-2008, 08:44 AM

This is even more fucked up...especially considering they are trying to convict that little girl for assault on a police officer?? Fucking pigs I swear to god I hate this country so much.

*Edit* Linkage would be nice I guess...

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=6436

Heh, I live pretty close to Gavleston. A jury there probably will not convict her of a crime, but damn that is just pathetic.

Honestly, this state just sucks beyond comparison.
Who cares about Florida? They were fucked since they were proclaimed a state. Flo - Rida, that's just dumb.

And I only care about this since California is my state.

Go wolverines?

It's pronounced Louisiana.

Slypieguy

12-20-2008, 08:51 AM

So you're saying people should be allowed to drive drunk?

Jezrith

12-20-2008, 08:52 AM

wat is this nonsense:

It's not the fact this already happened, it's the fact that this did happen.

link:
http://campaignforliberty.com/wire.php?view=1115

Been happening in Texas since the late 80's. But no worries, you are only a kook if you admit it happens, but talk like it's a bad thing. Remember it's for the children!

So you're saying people should be allowed to drive drunk?

They already are... ;)

Slypieguy

12-20-2008, 08:54 AM

They already are... ;)

Which law says they are? :)

Jezrith

12-20-2008, 08:58 AM

Which law says they are? :)

The law that says I can consume alcohol, get inebriated, and get in a car and drive it... probably laws concerning biology, physics, that type of thing.

ejnomad07

12-20-2008, 08:58 AM

didnt you hear about when the national guard after katrina stormed private houses with guns drawn and took guns from law abiding citizens with out provocation?

That same Katrina where everyone ran into stores like walmart and stole all the guns? That one?

Slypieguy

12-20-2008, 09:02 AM

The law that says I can consume alcohol, get inebriated, and get in a car and drive it... probably laws concerning biology, physics, that type of thing.

nice non-answer

the laws of physics allow you to purchase a gun and shoot someone in the head, so i guess that is "legal" too, right?

BladeofHearts

12-20-2008, 09:03 AM

I don't know much about the military, or American laws, so tell me to gtfo if you feel the need. Apparently military police, unless they belong to an agency that investigates within the United States Armed Forces, have duties similar to civilian police. They evidentally enforce the military laws, as well as Federal and State laws. So...Overreact much? I mean, you've got one county police department and a highway patrol doing this. If both are out checking for drunk drivers, who the hell is going to maintain security on the highway and in the county? Does it not make sense to perhaps bring in additional available resources to ease the stress on every group? Many hands make for light work.

PlugInMonster

12-20-2008, 09:04 AM

;2170799']The number of DUI-related deaths must be pretty out of control if they are resorting to this.

I'd like to hear the other side, and see some numbers before /tinfoiling

Exactly, until the DUI deaths fall to a more reasonable number the checkpoints on Friday night are totally justified in certain problem areas.

Jezrith

12-20-2008, 09:10 AM

Exactly, until the DUI deaths fall to a more reasonable number the checkpoints on Friday night are totally justified in certain problem areas.

It's not the checkpoints necessarily, it's the fact that on duty Military personnel are being used on them. Anyone who doesn't understand why this is bad a thing should be barred from ever voting for any political office, ever.

nice non-answer

the laws of physics allow you to purchase a gun and shoot someone in the head, so i guess that is "legal" too, right?

I never said anything about "legal". The law and what you are allowed to do don't really mesh so well. If the law could reach back in time and actually stop you from doing it, then I might agree with you. :)

PlugInMonster

12-20-2008, 09:17 AM

It's not the checkpoints necessarily, it's the fact that on duty Military personnel are being used on them. Anyone who doesn't understand why this is bad a thing should be barred from ever voting for any political office, ever.

Sure I get it, you don't want federal law enforcement where it doesn't belong. But would you see any qualitative difference between a soldier and FBI agent?

Apex Vertigo

12-20-2008, 09:23 AM

Sure I get it, you don't want federal law enforcement where it doesn't belong. But would you see any qualitative difference between a soldier and FBI agent?

The only one I can think of is one follows Federal law by being there and one doesn't?

What's the loop-hole they are using to do this, surely there is some reason they put forth for using the military other than 'because we want to'.

Jezrith

12-20-2008, 09:24 AM

Sure I get it, you don't want federal law enforcement where it doesn't belong.

The military is not federal law enforcement.

But would you see any qualitative difference between a soldier and FBI agent?

Yes, you see huge difference. The purpose, objectives, and SOPs are completely different. Even the scope of law governing the military is different from civilian organizations like the FBI. The actions of a solider fall under UCMJ long before it falls under local or state government. Hell it is its own entire different section of federal law.

What's the loop-hole they are using to do this, surely there is some reason they put forth for using the military other than 'because we want to'.

They get around Posse Comitatus by the fact that the soldiers don't actually make the official arrest.

Razel

12-20-2008, 09:52 AM

hum the fact they are using the military for this is quite... disturbing...

ikhoefnix

12-20-2008, 01:36 PM

They do checkpoints every year where I live during the holidays. Riding my motorcycle grants me easy passage. =P

Dredgon

12-20-2008, 02:08 PM

If a civil war occurs I will fight for the Confederacy!!!

[LoD] EE

12-20-2008, 02:15 PM

wat is this nonsense:

It's not the fact this already happened, it's the fact that this did happen.

link:
http://campaignforliberty.com/wire.php?view=1115

This isnt new for California at all.

They check for drunk people
They check for expired registration
They check for a license
They check for drugs ( yes sometimes they have drug dogs walk around the cars )
They make you pull over and pop your hood if you look modified
Yet, they wont detain you and deport you if you dont speak English.

Its fucking bullshit.

Dragor

12-20-2008, 03:47 PM

well I love my country <3 :rolleyes: fucking america ! :P

Brekken

12-20-2008, 04:01 PM

First of all it was never in the constitution, it was two laws that prohibited it, The Posee Comitatus act and the insurrection act. The Posse comitatus act of 1878 essentially prohibits federal troops "from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. The Coast Guard is exempt from the Act."

Passed in 1807 the general aim of The insurrection act is to limit Presidential power as much as possible, relying on state and local governments for initial response in the event of insurrection. Coupled with the Posse Comitatus Act, Presidential powers for law enforcement are limited and delayed.

Now in the spirit of this Administration ignoring whole sections of the constitution or laws they find inconvenient they slipped in a little amendment to the Posse Comitatus act that says "The President may employ the armed forces... to... restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition... the President determines that... domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order... or [to] suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such... a condition... so hinders the execution of the laws... that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law... or opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

Notice the bolded or underlined part. I has given the President complete freedom because anything can be called an "other condition". This has resulted in the first deployment of regularly scheduled active mission troops within our own borders since Reconstruction.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/

Agge

12-20-2008, 04:17 PM

Gogogo uSSa.

Skree

12-20-2008, 04:21 PM

They get around Posse Comitatus by the fact that the soldiers don't actually make the official arrest.I beg to differ. They are not "getting around" Posse Comitatus. They already broke it.

Why ? Because they are setting 1 president after another while drones (not directed at you Jezrith) like ejnomad07 , Desperado[1G] and PlugInMonster (if he's even from the US) minimize or try to remain "objective" (puke) while 1 administration after another violates the constitution and the laws of this nation that they swear an oath to uphold. http://forums.darkfallonline.com/showthread.php?t=71135&highlight=posse%27+comitatus

Anyone who actually calls this what it really is is labeled "tinfoil" which is simply a chickenshit way to avoid actually "thinking". The people giving the orders are simply traitors to this country. As are the elected representatives who allow it.

When the revolution comes it will be as it always has been in history, the common citizens defending themselves from a government they will no longer abide. It will be the citizens defending the constitution, the laws of the nation, their rights and freedoms from a tyrannical government.

Stick that in your tinfoil hats and smoke it.

Skree

StainlessSteelRat

12-20-2008, 04:24 PM

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/

I was gonna dig this up if no one else did. Much worse than drunk driving checkpoints although both are unbelievable.

Course, I don't think checkpoints are legal when the military isn't involved. ;)

Surly

12-20-2008, 04:31 PM

I beg to differ. They are not "getting around" Posse Comitatus. They already broke it.

Why ? Because they are setting 1 president after another while drones (not directed at you Jezrith) like ejnomad07 , Desperado[1G] and PlugInMonster (if he's even from the US) minimize or try to remain "objective" (puke) while 1 administration after another violates the constitution and the laws of this nation that they swear an oath to uphold. http://forums.darkfallonline.com/showthread.php?t=71135&highlight=posse%27+comitatus

Anyone who actually calls this what it really is is labeled "tinfoil" which is simply a chickenshit way to avoid actually "thinking". The people giving the orders are simply traitors to this country. As are the elected representatives who allow it.

When the revolution comes it will be as it always has been in history, the common citizens defending themselves from a government they will no longer abide. It will be the citizens defending the constitution, the laws of the nation, their rights and freedoms from a tyrannical government.

Stick that in your tinfoil hats and smoke it.

Skree
When the fuck did you turn so awesome? It boggles my mind.

tallefred

12-20-2008, 04:33 PM

Skree

12-20-2008, 06:00 PM

When the fuck did you turn so awesome? It boggles my mind.Been saying the same and similar things here for years. :)

Skree

Jezrith

12-20-2008, 06:21 PM

I beg to differ. They are not "getting around" Posse Comitatus. They already broke it.

They are breaking the spirit of the law instead of the letter of the law, while I think that makes it even worse, a lot judges don't see it that way.

Desperado[1G]

12-20-2008, 06:26 PM

Am I being flamed for wanting to know the facts of the matter?

How many people die to drunk drivers each day/month/year in San Bernardino? Are the local police shorthanded? Why are the MP's there? Are they searching the vehicles, or just asking for license/registration?

Excuse me for not flying off at the handle about a situation I know nothing about.

Uilamin

12-20-2008, 07:17 PM

Nevron

12-20-2008, 07:30 PM

ClownFoot

12-20-2008, 07:36 PM

Agge

12-20-2008, 07:38 PM

Oh look at me, I'm american. Everyone is driving drunk and killing people, even though it's illegal. If the government has to take extreme measures to save countless lives and enforce a law, we must be living in a fucking police state. How dare they try to keep us safe!

Is it worth the price of freedom?

Nevron

12-20-2008, 07:39 PM

ClownFoot

12-20-2008, 07:41 PM

Is it worth the price of freedom?

Excuse me? Are you in some way suggesting that by putting a few more people on the road to protect you, you are now a slave? Are they going to be sending those trucks out to take you all away to the plantations when they are done? The only freedom you are losing is the freedom to drive drunk.

Uilamin

12-20-2008, 08:05 PM

Military police aren't "police officers employed by the military", they're just MPs. While that's basically a military cop, it doesn't translate to being certified as a police officer in the civilian sector. Maybe it's just the way you said it making it sound like MPs are pre-existing police officers just hired on through the military. However, they are not "by all means considered police officers", because they still have to go through the academy (in most cases) and training in order to become civilian law enforcement.

i actually checked some facts and apparently MPs in the US play a different role than in every other country.

In most cases MPs are grendamarine or play an equivalent role. In the US they have a limited role of being grandamarine.

Now the laws people mention saying this is circumventing their rights, well that only applies (legally) to the army and airforce. The navy and marine usually follow the same regulations, but that is out of tradition and not because of law. But also [from wikipedia]

MPs may enforce certain limited powers, such as traffic stops, on access roads and other federal property not necessarily within the boundaries of their military base or installation

I believe the major highways are federal property in the states (i could be wrong). therefore, even if they are military police from the army or airforce they can be deployed there.

Vessol

12-20-2008, 08:06 PM

Uilamin

12-20-2008, 08:44 PM

No, it shows that they are becoming lax about following the god damned constitution.

the law that prevents the army and airforce from deploying on non-federal property in the US isn't a part of the constitution... it was an act passed in 1878.

besides it is the marine corp MPs being deployed anyways, not the army or airforce ones, therefore exempt.

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

SSguy

12-20-2008, 09:12 PM

It's not the checkpoints necessarily, it's the fact that on duty Military personnel are being used on them. Anyone who doesn't understand why this is bad a thing should be barred from ever voting for any political office, ever.

If there was anything illegal about it...wouldn't there be lawyers up in arms all over the state?

I have no problem with the military being used to reinforce our police that are enforcing just laws. Far better than them being used to enforce unjust laws.

If there was any problem with the situation going against the consitution, show some articles where lawyers are attacking it.

Lethn

12-20-2008, 09:17 PM

If there was any problem with the situation going against the consitution, show some articles where lawyers are attacking it.

It's illegal to have active military personnel on American soil these aren't 'just' police sent over to re-inforce civilian police, they're active millitary personnel on American soil. And frankly I'm going to keep fucking saying that until it gets drilled into your head, the likiliest reason that their are lawyers not attacking this is because either they don't know about it or they are and the media hasn't reported it yet as it has only happened recently.

What many people fail to realize is that for years and years now the American government has been constantly manipulating every aspect of mainstream media as well so more than likely your average person who doesn't even bother glancing at the internet once in awhile or read the smaller pieces of media is not going to know about this.

I fucking hate people who try to gloss over stuff like this and stay "Ohhh they're only military police!" as if we're the people at fault here. I'd be fine if it was oh they're just pulling in new civilian policeman to that particular area but it's not, they've blatantly gone ahead and ignored the very laws that they are supposed to be obeying.

I hope the militia's out there in America fuck them up and fuck them up good so they can't destroy the country again.

SSguy

12-20-2008, 09:20 PM

Is it worth the price of freedom?

What freedom?? Being allowed to drive drunk and kill innocent people and take away their freedom to live?

No, it shows that they are becoming lax about following the god damned constitution.

Considering theres no hard evidence yet to be show it in clear violation of the constitution, and only the otherway around, you fail.

Fluffington

12-20-2008, 09:22 PM

I will never cease to be amazed by how paranoid everyone in the United States is.

Lethn

12-20-2008, 09:23 PM

What freedom?? Being allowed to drive drunk and kill innocent people and take away their freedom to live?

Then they should direct more police there to re-inforce them instead of introducing bullshit measures like bringing in the military.

Drunks are terrorists woooooo!

Yes I hate drunk drivers too but if I can't even walk out in the street just because some stupid fuck thinks that we should bring the military in over someone being drunk then I'm gonna be pissed.

Fluffington

12-20-2008, 09:24 PM

Is it worth the price of freedom?

I didn't see any rights violated here. There is room for abuse but this was obviously a step taken to prevent drunk driving, not to police the state. If they really wanted to make the US into a police state they would. Putting the military into a few highways isn't going to ease anyone into a police state so put down the tinfoil.

Fluffington

12-20-2008, 09:26 PM

Then they should direct more police there to re-inforce them instead of introducing bullshit measures like bringing in the military.

Drunks are terrorists woooooo!

Yes I hate drunk drivers too but if I can't even walk out in the street just because some stupid fuck thinks that we should bring the military in over someone being drunk then I'm gonna be pissed.

If you cannot walk down the street because you cannot trust or even fear the military or police there is something wrong with your country or yourself. Seeing as people are not being executed by firing squad by these people then I cannot but assume you are simply paranoid.

Lethn

12-20-2008, 09:26 PM

This kind of stuff makes me glad that the UK has retained a tiny bit of its sanity :(

As a matter of fact the British police are people that I think are the most professional in the entire world, but if I ever fucking went to America I'd treat them exactly as I'd treat thugs in a street.

And I live in the UK dumbass, but I'm pretty damn concerned about whats happening over in America because I have some friends there.

SSguy

12-20-2008, 09:28 PM

the likiliest reason that their are lawyers not attacking this is because either they don't know about it or they are and the media hasn't reported it yet as it has only happened recently.

Obviously they haven't made it public....I mean, forumfall has its own news reporters that beat real news reporters all the time right?

What many people fail to realize is that for years and years now the American government has been constantly manipulating every aspect of mainstream media as well so more than likely your average person who doesn't even bother glancing at the internet once in awhile or read the smaller pieces of media is not going to know about this.

No shithead, we already know this. We've known the government has been corrupt since it started. The thing is that its not worth the time, effort, destruction of property/businesses/lives/whatever to overthrow the government outright. Instead we try to change it for the better because we currently enjoy more freedoms that probably half the world doesn't and the other half enjoys just as much.

The thing about this is, if they are using a loophole, they are using it for a good cause, so most of us wouldn't get pissed.
It would be like getting angry at a police officer for using some loop hole in the law to shoot and kill a bunch of criminals that are going to execute hostages. I'm sure the tinfoil hats would nerd rage all over that.

I fucking hate people who try to gloss over stuff like this and stay "Ohhh they're only military police!" as if we're the people at fault here. I'd be fine if it was oh they're just pulling in new civilian policeman to that particular area but it's not, they've blatantly gone ahead and ignored the very laws that they are supposed to be obeying.

The peopel are at fault....constant breaking of a simple law that is getting others killed. Please show the laws they are suppose to obey, I believe the exact opposite has already been posted.

I hope the militia's out there in America fuck them up and fuck them up good so they can't destroy the country again.

So now you are calling for a civil war??

Vessol

12-20-2008, 09:28 PM

This kind of stuff makes me glad that the UK has retained a tiny bit of its sanity :(

And instead installs camera's on every street corner to spy on their citizens.

Lethn

12-20-2008, 09:29 PM

And instead installs camera's on every street corner to spy on their citizens.

Actually they haven't done that, I believe they decided it would be against peoples' rights or something, hasn't stopped them placing speed cameras everywhere though lmao.

People in America don't realize that the government we have here is actually very easy going as far as peoples personal rights are concerned I just think a lot of idiots like Gordon Brown have latched on to Bush's irrational fear of Terrorists.

SSguy

12-20-2008, 09:31 PM

This kind of stuff makes me glad that the UK has retained a tiny bit of its sanity :(

You can't own a gun to protect yourself........what the fuck is wrong with you? You call that "sane" yet you go apeshit over the idea that our military police are helping our civilian police enforce safety laws that are blatantly being ignored and causing innocents to die and insurance premiums to go up?

And I live in the UK dumbass, but I'm pretty damn concerned about whats happening over in America because I have some friends there.

Perhaps you should focus your efforts in not getting stabbed or killed by a replica samurai sword. :lmao::lmao::lmao:

Fluffington

12-20-2008, 09:31 PM

Wait, people think that the government controls the media? Seriously? The shit you watch on TV is run by the corporations which go out there and support politicians and lobbyists. So if anything the government would be run by the media or at least the people controlling the media. Maybe you are mixing up two conspiracy theories. The media is not controlled by the government, this much is obvious, unless the government doesn't mind people criticizing it's leader.

tallefred

12-20-2008, 09:33 PM

Excuse me? Are you in some way suggesting that by putting a few more people on the road to protect you, you are now a slave? Are they going to be sending those trucks out to take you all away to the plantations when they are done? The only freedom you are losing is the freedom to drive drunk.

I don't care what the effects are, the government has an obligation to keep the laws it makes. If they break a law forbidding cops eating donuts on Sunday, it's just as bad as if they break a law forbidding them from shipping Jews off to be burnt. If the government can't abide by the restrictions they set for themselves, we have a real problem.

The fact of the matter is that this is just another instance where the government is breaking it's own laws. THAT'S the problem here- no one gives a fuck what brand of cop is pulling them over, the problem is that the government is consistently disobeying their own laws. You can keep fooling yourself into thinking that "it's just a different type of cop, what's the big deal?", but you're turning a blind eye to the government flouting the constitution again. It's getting to the point where the constitution is just a set of guidelines the government follows as long as it doesn't get in the way of their agenda, but as soon as it interferes they just change it.

History has shown that people tend to hold onto this attitude until it's too late. Let's not let that happen again.

SSguy

12-20-2008, 09:36 PM

I will never cease to be amazed by how paranoid everyone in the United States is.

Please note that lethn is from the UK, so its not everyone here.

Then they should direct more police there to re-inforce them instead of introducing bullshit measures like bringing in the military.

And leave other areas unprotected and insufficiently patrolled? Wow, you sir are a genius at human resource management. Its not like you can pull well trained police officers out of your fucking ass.

And this isn't even the full fledged military like your making it sound, let me know when they got tanks stopped people to check licenses.

Drunks are terrorists woooooo!

I think drunk drivers kill more people than terrorists do here in America, so I'd imagine they are worse than terrorists.

Yes I hate drunk drivers too but if I can't even walk out in the street just because some stupid fuck thinks that we should bring the military in over someone being drunk then I'm gonna be pissed.

You should be worried about the fact you can't walk out on the street with any means of protecting yourself while criminals secure illegal guns. I hope you get shot while you walk out in paranoia, you are fucking idiot.

You've got some serious anti-authority issues.

Fluffington

12-20-2008, 09:39 PM

I don't care what the effects are, the government has an obligation to keep the laws it makes. If they break a law forbidding cops eating donuts on Sunday, it's just as bad as if they break a law forbidding them from shipping Jews off to be burnt. If the government can't abide by the restrictions they set for themselves, we have a real problem.
Can't it be an honest mistake? Perhaps the law is old and outdated, so it is no longer used. These things happen. You seem to think the government suddenly decided their laws no longer apply to them, this is not true.

The fact of the matter is that this is just another instance where the government is breaking it's own laws. THAT'S the problem here- no one gives a fuck what brand of cop is pulling them over, the problem is that the government is consistently disobeying their own laws. You can keep fooling yourself into thinking that "it's just a different type of cop, what's the big deal?", but you're turning a blind eye to the government flouting the constitution again. It's getting to the point where the constitution is just a set of guidelines the government follows as long as it doesn't get in the way of their agenda, but as soon as it interferes they just change it.
Laws contradict each other, that is just how things end up. I don't see any harm in this law, this looks like paranoia to me.

History has shown that people tend to hold onto this attitude until it's too late. Let's not let that happen again.
Seriously, just shut up. The most likely cause of civil unrest will be economic trouble. People will rise up because they can no longer afford to live, if they rise at all. The government is not out to control you for fun, which seems to be the popular view of things here.

SSguy

12-20-2008, 09:40 PM

The fact of the matter is that this is just another instance where the government is breaking it's own laws. THAT'S the problem here- no one gives a fuck what brand of cop is pulling them over, the problem is that the government is consistently disobeying their own laws.

WHAT LAWS? PLEASE POINT THEM OUT, All I've seen is some vague reference to the constitution and that has already been disputed and explained.

History has shown that people tend to hold onto this attitude until it's too late. Let's not let that happen again.

History has also shown there are people who hate police for no reason other than they don't allow them to break laws.
History has also shown there are people who misinterpret EVERYTHING and go crazy based off of self fueld speculation.
History has also shown there are people on these forums that can't read more than two posts into a thread before they post some shit that was already addressed.

Fluffington

12-20-2008, 09:43 PM

Please note that lethn is from the UK, so its not everyone here.
Then he should know better!

And leave other areas unprotected and insufficiently patrolled? Wow, you sir are a genius at human resource management. Its not like you can pull well trained police officers out of your fucking ass.
They can get trained police officers in a few years, but that would require more funding. Funding is given through taxes, which for some reason people hate.

And this isn't even the full fledged military like your making it sound, let me know when they got tanks stopped people to check licenses.
Nor do they silence the dissent of this law. If the US was in bad shape or planning for marshal law they would shut people up who disagree or oppose this, which they arn't.

I think drunk drivers kill more people than terrorists do here in America, so I'd imagine they are worse than terrorists.
Agreed.

You should be worried about the fact you can't walk out on the street with any means of protecting yourself while criminals secure illegal guns. I hope you get shot while you walk out in paranoia, you are fucking idiot.

You've got some serious anti-authority issues.

<3

tallefred

12-20-2008, 09:49 PM

Can't it be an honest mistake? Perhaps the law is old and outdated, so it is no longer used. These things happen. You seem to think the government suddenly decided their laws no longer apply to them, this is not true.

Laws contradict each other, that is just how things end up. I don't see any harm in this law, this looks like paranoia to me.

Seriously, just shut up. The most likely cause of civil unrest will be economic trouble. People will rise up because they can no longer afford to live, if they rise at all. The government is not out to control you for fun, which seems to be the popular view of things here.

I can't argue about what the law is, I'm just explaining why people SHOULD be worried if there is indeed a law about it. The government has been fucking around with a lot of bullshit in the past few years, changing little aspects of laws left and right to suit their purposes.

I don't think the government is out to control me for fun, but I do think the government is no longer working for and representing the people as they should be. They're called "public servants", not "whoever gives me more money's servant". Once this happens it's time to kick them out and put someone else in their place.

Lethn

12-20-2008, 09:58 PM

lulz a guy called "SSGuy" ( hint hint for those who know your history ) is telling be about human resource management how fun.

Also I think the gun ownership and self-defense laws here are bullshit too, that's why I plan on leaving this country, but at least the cops are still decent people here, but no I'm not going to argue with someone on this who calls himself SSguy because he's an obvious troll.

tallefred

12-20-2008, 10:03 PM

but no I'm not going to argue with someone on this who calls himself SSguy because he's an obvious troll.

That's no reason not to argue with someone. Think of the +1s!

Lethn

12-20-2008, 10:06 PM

That's no reason not to argue with someone. Think of the +1s!

Only on AD ;)

Fuzzball

12-20-2008, 10:12 PM

I see no problem with this at all. If you don't have a drivers license with you and you get caught at this checkpoint, it's your fault, not the governments.

Skree

12-20-2008, 10:22 PM

the law that prevents the army and airforce from deploying on non-federal property in the US isn't a part of the constitution... it was an act passed in 1878.

besides it is the marine corp MPs being deployed anyways, not the army or airforce ones, therefore exempt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act Congratulations you are technically correct, and you are missing the point completely.

Americans are asleep and being conditioned (as is the military). MP's on the highway, combat troops stationed on US soil with a combat zone that is US soil (see previous links), military exercises including law enforcement in Texas (for many years now), deploying private mercenary companies in New Orleans on the streets after the hurricane...etc...etc...ad nauseum

You can see examples of Drone-think in posts here on this board from idiots like Clownfoot and others who don't understand why it doesn't matter what the propaganda used as justification is. It doesn't matter what loopholes in the law are. It doesn't matter what "the other side" thinks.

It matters that militarism is on the rise, it matters that the "Patriot Act" was implemented, it matters the Telecommunications Corporations committed crimes in assisting the government illegally spy on US citizens and then got a pardon from the same government.

These acts are not the 1st time any of this has been done. They are the latest and what is important is, the the pace is quickening and is being done in the open with impunity.

Not some backroom conspiracy, not some Watergate break in by a few "rogue" operators. This is right in front of your face.

Corporatism and fascism are on the rise. Right out in the open. Traitors are running the country and looting the piggy bank (for many years now) and, they are prepared to to use armed force against the citizens of the US to defend their right to do so.

So find your happy place, cuz for me it seems pretty obvious that what is coming is as inevitable as the sun rising.

Skree

Brekken

12-20-2008, 10:27 PM

I see no problem with this at all. If you don't have a drivers license with you and you get caught at this checkpoint, it's your fault, not the governments.

No wonder we have lost so many of our freedoms and protections already with the rampant ignorance and apathy displayed here. Patriot act, Abu Gharib, Guantanamo, second amendment used as toilet paper, secret prisons accross the world, suspension of Habeus corpus for US citizens, telecommuncations immunity for spying on us, secret wiretaps with warrants, fourth amendment violations everywhere, Posse comitatatus and insurrection act amended and ignored etc.

Benjamin Franklin said : Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.

Edmund Burke said : All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

Brekken

12-20-2008, 10:29 PM

Nice post Skree

tallefred

12-20-2008, 10:33 PM

Jezrith

12-20-2008, 10:51 PM

first off it is military police being deployed alongside local police. Military police are police officers employed by the military to be a 'police force' for their bases. They are by all means considered regular police officers except are attached to military groups as opposed to civilian groups.

Also military police are commonly deployed in the US, probably in multiple locations daily. They police the military bases in the US, so umm what is the problem with police doing their jobs?

They are still a millitary police, therefore not a civilian police force. They are supposed to police military personnel on military property, not civilians on a state/city thoroughfare. Join the military and maybe you will understand the difference.

If there was anything illegal about it...wouldn't there be lawyers up in arms all over the state?

The reason there are not lawsuits all over the place, as I have already explained once, is because technically what they are doing isn't illegal. They are not being used to actually make the arrest. If they did, the charge would be thrown out of court by a judge. The police are making the arrest, not the military. While this is technically legal, it completely flies in the face of the spirit of Posse Comittatus. The spirit of this law is to stop the military from becoming a domestic police force, which is only answerable to POTUS, not the citizenry. It's a disgusting practice that is only supported by the worst of authoritarians and petty tyrants.

I have no problem with the military being used to reinforce our police that are enforcing just laws. Far better than them being used to enforce unjust laws.

If there was any problem with the situation going against the consitution, show some articles where lawyers are attacking it

If only we didn't have so many statists in this world, it would definitely be a better place. The government using military force against it's own people to enforce civilian laws should be fucking repulsive to any free man.

Everto

12-20-2008, 11:26 PM

;2172337']Am I being flamed for wanting to know the facts of the matter?

How many people die to drunk drivers each day/month/year in San Bernardino? Are the local police shorthanded? Why are the MP's there? Are they searching the vehicles, or just asking for license/registration?

Excuse me for not flying off at the handle about a situation I know nothing about.

The police can handle their own affairs, you do not need automatic rifles and grenades to cure drunk driving.

http://forums.darkfallonline.com/showthread.php?p=2173524&posted=1#post2173524

I wish I could combine threads.
Video was repost, but idc, it's my thread now so I gain priority.

Nevron

12-20-2008, 11:33 PM

The police can handle their own affairs, you do not need automatic rifles and grenades to cure drunk driving.

Why assume assault rifles and grenades are involved? MPs wear pretty much the same standard equipment as police officers, but with a different uniform. They even drive around in Crown Vics and Impalas just like your average civilian cop.

Unless it's been sourced or stated otherwise, that's a baseless assumption.

ikhoefnix

12-20-2008, 11:37 PM

If you are scared of the cops that means you are doing something illegal.

Vesavius

12-20-2008, 11:46 PM

If you are scared of the cops that means you are doing something illegal.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=6bVa6jn4rpE

Yep, sure it does.

The police of any country have never been misused right? They have never individually, abused their power right?

heroshade

12-20-2008, 11:46 PM

wat is this nonsense:

It's not the fact this already happened, it's the fact that this did happen.

link:
http://campaignforliberty.com/wire.php?view=1115

I wouldn't be too afraid until they break out the machine guns and roof snipers for protestors.

tallefred

12-20-2008, 11:55 PM

I wouldn't be too afraid until they break out the machine guns and roof snipers for protestors.

One of the stupidest things you have ever said.

Don't you think prevention is better than cure?

Nevron

12-20-2008, 11:55 PM

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=6bVa6jn4rpE

Yep, sure it does.

The police of any country have never been misused right? They have never individually, abused their power right?

That dude deserved tazed. He was being disruptive, they were going to remove him from the floor, and he resisted. You need to cite a better example for your point, because that one doesn't fly.

Eskareon

12-21-2008, 12:01 AM

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=6bVa6jn4rpE

Yep, sure it does.

The police of any country have never been misused right? They have never individually, abused their power right?

Please stop giving that moron attention. He got what he wanted, now let's hope he never does again.

I don't mind sobriety and license checkpoints. Beats having the cops "cracking down" on street racing.

Vesavius

12-21-2008, 12:10 AM

That dude deserved tazed. He was being disruptive, they were going to remove him from the floor, and he resisted. You need to cite a better example for your point, because that one doesn't fly.

I really think we saw different things in that film.

The stage gave him permission to ask his quest, that is there at the start, and at no point did he assault anyone. At the most he passively resisted, for which he could have, at the most, been carried from the building. There were more then enough officers there to handle him, if thats what he really needed, without the use of a weapon.

Really... You live in world where people asking 'awkard' questions on an open floor is 'disruptive' and deserving of a tasing?

I guess Ghandi would have as well in your mind right?

Ahh, you know what... have it your way... I just hope noone comes to your aid, or your childrens aid, when in the future you or them are tased in the street, and then held with no evidence on 'suspicion' of activities vs the state, just because you tried to speak out.

I hope you feel very alone.

I'm done here now I think.

Nevron

12-21-2008, 12:24 AM

I really think we saw different things in that film.

The stage gave him permission to ask his quest, that is there at the start, and at no point did he assault anyone. At the most he passively resisted, for which he could have, at the most, been carried from the building. There were more then enough officers there to handle him, if thats what he really needed, without the use of a weapon.

Really... You live in world where people asking 'awkard' questions on an open floor is 'disruptive' and deserving of a tasing?

I guess Ghandi would have as well in your mind right?

Ahh, you know what... have it your way... I just hope noone comes to your aid, or your childrens aid, when in the future you or them are tased in the street, and then held with no evidence on 'suspicion' of activities vs the state, just because you tried to speak out.

I hope you feel very alone.

I'm done here now I think.

Fuck no you're not done.

You're linking him being tazed directly with the question he asked. While I agree that the question probably wasn't deserving for his removal, his behavior while being removed and violently resisting warranted him being tazed. So no, we didn't see different things, we just saw things differently. I'm just not going to be black and white about the situation and say he was tazed because he asked a stupid question.

"Oh no, he asked a stupid question, taze him!" -If that's really how you saw it go down, you should be mushroom stamped into a coma.

The rest of your post is irrelevant, wishing ill upon me and my family just to try to guilt me into agreeing with you. Go fuck yourself.

tallefred

12-21-2008, 12:29 AM

Fuck no you're not done.

You're linking him being tazed directly with the question he asked. While I agree that the question probably wasn't deserving for his removal, his behavior while being removed and violently resisting warranted him being tazed. So no, we didn't see different things, we just saw things differently. I'm just not going to be black and white about the situation and say he was tazed because he asked a stupid question.

"Oh no, he asked a stupid question, taze him!" -If that's really how you saw it go down, you should be mushroom stamped into a coma.

The rest of your post is irrelevant, wishing ill upon me and my family just to try to guilt me into agreeing with you. Go fuck yourself.

Violently resisting arrest? Did we watch the same video?? He didn't even fucking touch the cops! He had his hands in the air the entire time. What he did is known as passive resistance.

Nevron

12-21-2008, 12:32 AM

Violently resisting arrest? Did we watch the same video?? He didn't even fucking touch the cops! He had his hands in the air the entire time. What he did is known as passive resistance.

Yeah, had his hands in the air the entire time, except for when he was flailing his elbows around like a dipshit, not to mention he tried to linebacker through them all. Don't put too much emphasis on it though, I didn't mean it like he was going balls out trying to resist with full force.

kyrilius

12-21-2008, 12:34 AM

So you're saying people should be allowed to drive drunk?

Law abiding citizens should be able to drive their cars down public roads without being stopped or questioned by "authorities".

Fluffington

12-21-2008, 12:45 AM

Law abiding citizens should be able to drive their cars down public roads without being stopped or questioned by "authorities".

In Canada there are ride programs which stop everyone going on a certain road to see if anyone is driving drunk. They do not ask for ID or anything, just ask you how you are, suspicion leads to questioning. Guess what, it works. Getting your panties in a bunch is worth stopping people who drive drunk and risk their death or the deaths of others.

Even traffic laws are set up to assume you have no intention of breaking the law, and your guilt is assumed. I guess you would think this a problem because by your nonsensical definition of justice punishing those who break the law is less important then the mild inconviniences of those who don't.

Eskareon

12-21-2008, 12:47 AM

Skiffs

12-21-2008, 12:48 AM

tallefred

12-21-2008, 12:52 AM

yeah, the world is in for a hell of a ride. Starting with the USA, its funny how both Cheny and Bush both bought land over seas a few months back just as they leave office. thats fishy. Are they going to leave as soon as shit hits the fan? Canada is allready broken, mexico has been broke, and were the middle man. Were doomed. grab your tinfoils

I'm pretty sure it started in Greece, correct me if I'm wrong...

Also, I didn't see much resistance, I saw him with his hands in the air except for when the police were holding onto them.

Fluffington

12-21-2008, 12:52 AM

Fluffington

12-21-2008, 12:53 AM

I'm pretty sure it started in Greece, correct me if I'm wrong...

That was riots against police, you demi-anarchists should support that sort of nonsense.

Forgin

12-21-2008, 12:55 AM

God I love my country, my great semi-socialist country.

tallefred

12-21-2008, 12:56 AM

That was riots against police, you demi-anarchists should support that sort of nonsense.

Exactly.

Lethn

12-21-2008, 01:00 AM

being removed and violently resisting warranted him being tazed.

rofl this quote just ridicules everything you guys say you believe in, don't bother arguing with sheep, they'll just put a spin on everything you say because they can't argue in any other way.

Fluffington

12-21-2008, 01:01 AM

rofl this quote just ridicules everything you guys say you believe in, don't bother arguing with sheep, they'll just put a spin on everything you say because they can't argue in any other way.

So the police were totally set on tazing someone and risk getting sued and fired or they are in some sort of massive conspiracy to turn the US into a police state, and they are supposed to slowly hint at it with actions?

Lethn

12-21-2008, 01:07 AM

So the police were totally set on tazing someone and risk getting sued and fired or they are in some sort of massive conspiracy to turn the US into a police state, and they are supposed to slowly hint at it with actions?

look at the evidence and look at the facts that have been cropping up more and more lately, I'm no conspiracy theorist I'm a realist and no I'm not going to bother arguing with people like you because you won't believe it's happening until your seeing military walking down your street and knocking on your door, or in the more likely case, kicking it down.

tallefred

12-21-2008, 01:10 AM

So the police were totally set on tazing someone and risk getting sued and fired or they are in some sort of massive conspiracy to turn the US into a police state, and they are supposed to slowly hint at it with actions?

Are you aware of how much power the government has right now? The Bush administration passed a bunch of new legislature, maybe you weren't looking? Perhaps you should do a little bit more research on the subject.

The U.S. is certainly headed towards totalitarianism. I'm not saying that's where it's going, but as the government gains power the citizens lose it. We won't necessarily end up like Nazi Germany, but the government having that much power is not good, because if they wanted they COULD turn the U.S. into a police state.

The whole concept of America is a country where the government has limited power. That's why we have checks and balances and all that jazz. If the Founding Fathers could've seen how this country turned out they would be horrified.

Nevron

12-21-2008, 01:10 AM

rofl this quote just ridicules everything you guys say you believe in, don't bother arguing with sheep, they'll just put a spin on everything you say because they can't argue in any other way.

Hey fuckbag, how about you actually argue a fucking point instead of quoting people out of context and replying with your typical "this guy's a sheep, hahaha" comments? That's all you ever fucking do on these forums. It's no wonder nobody around here fucking likes you and ridicules your post count. It's because most of what you say is either irrelevant or pointless. So let's try making a point, huh? What is your disagreement with what I said in what you quoted?

Attau

12-21-2008, 01:17 AM

People are buying into this whole "Well if I'm not guilty why should I worry about it?" mentality because.... well frankly they are just stupid.

Apparently at some point in the last few hundred years humans defeated corruption and no longer have to worry about those with power seeking more of it. It's america for fucks sake! They just want to protect us and of course we'll stay free! :rolleyes:

Even pretending that our current government is without agenda and strategy for gaining more power over the constituency... why wouldn't the greedy and wealthy be trying harder than ever to corrupt these offices as they become more powerful? It's a totally flawed mentality and the population WILL pay for it. Maybe not this year... maybe not obama's terms... but it will happen. Humanity has not defeated those who seek world conquest and it has not defeated those that think the general population is trash that can be enslaved and manipulated for their benefit.

Eskareon

12-21-2008, 01:21 AM

tallefred

12-21-2008, 01:21 AM

tallefred

12-21-2008, 01:23 AM

Yes, hundreds of people in national government, thousands in state governments, and millions in the general public are going to all collaborate to help the United States turn into a tyrannical police state.

Yes. Believable. Plausible. Absolutely possible.

That's all you really need. State governments wouldn't be able to stop them. That's a lot of tinfoil though, like I said I don't think they will... the problem is that they COULD. They are definitely trying to get as much control as they can over the populace.

Skree

12-21-2008, 01:23 AM

Spankytwo

12-21-2008, 01:23 AM

OMFG ITS A GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY!!!! FIRST THE DRUNKS, THEN THE HANDICAPPED, THEN THE WHITES!!!! ITS ALL PART OF A PLAN TO TAKE OUT THE ARYN NATION!!!!!!! GOV DID 9/11!!!! ZEITGEIST FTW!!!!

/tinfoil hat

tallefred

12-21-2008, 01:31 AM

I don't think it's going to get to a police state for one simple reason- the economic collapse. These riots in Greece are an indicator of what's to come. People all over the world are going to rise up and take down their governments and bring in a new world order.

On the other hand, the opposite could be true. Governments could use this as an excuse to tighten control of the markets and the populace. I prefer to be optimistic and think that people will have the balls and the brains to stand up for themselves before it comes to that though, because once it does it may be too late.

Eskareon

12-21-2008, 01:33 AM

... the problem is that they COULD.

And a meteorite COULD land on you tomorrow.

tallefred

12-21-2008, 01:55 AM

And a meteorite COULD land on you tomorrow.

Do you really want your government to have unlimited power? Are you that stupid? Your analogy is idiotic because it's something which is not in your control, what we're discussing here is something that we could change if you dumbasses would stop being so fucking apathetic. Please stop with the stupid sarcastic comments, they're a waste of time. If you have something intelligent to say that's above a 3rd grade level, feel free to do so and I will be happy to argue it out with you, but stop wasting everyone's time with stupid shit like this.

Eskareon

12-21-2008, 03:40 AM

Do you really want your government to have unlimited power? Are you that stupid? Your analogy is idiotic because it's something which is not in your control, what we're discussing here is something that we could change if you dumbasses would stop being so fucking apathetic. Please stop with the stupid sarcastic comments, they're a waste of time. If you have something intelligent to say that's above a 3rd grade level, feel free to do so and I will be happy to argue it out with you, but stop wasting everyone's time with stupid shit like this.

Maybe I should up my Paranoia stat so I can carry on a better conversation with you.

SSguy

12-21-2008, 03:43 AM

The reason there are not lawsuits all over the place, as I have already explained once, is because technically what they are doing isn't illegal. They are not being used to actually make the arrest. If they did, the charge would be thrown out of court by a judge. The police are making the arrest, not the military. While this is technically legal, it completely flies in the face of the spirit of Posse Comittatus. The spirit of this law is to stop the military from becoming a domestic police force, which is only answerable to POTUS, not the citizenry. It's a disgusting practice that is only supported by the worst of authoritarians and petty tyrants.

Ok...so its legal....they aren't making arrests...all they are doing is observing.....where is the problem again?
Lets go over this again...they aren't making arrests, them standing there isn't illegal.....so at what point do they become a police force??

I think you are just angry because you like driving drunk like a moron, or maybe you are one of those people who hate authority no matter what.

tallefred

12-21-2008, 03:48 AM

Maybe I should up my Paranoia stat so I can carry on a better conversation with you.

Put those points in Intelligence instead.

SSguy

12-21-2008, 03:59 AM

Law abiding citizens should be able to drive their cars down public roads without being stopped or questioned by "authorities".

How do you know they are law abiding when they aren't questioned? Do you realize if there wasn't a problem escalating out of control or atleast seemed like it would, those citizens would not be getting questioned while driving? They have no one to blame but themselves or the citizens that are driving drunk.

Also, driving is a privaledge, not a right. So no, theres nothing stating in the constitution that people should be able to drive around without being stopped and questioned.

Put those points in Intelligence instead.
Considering your ilk is attempting to turn the event of military police LEGALLY observing civilian police making arrests, WHILE NOT MAKING ARRESTS THEMSELVES, into a "government turning it into a police state we are all doomed" event, I'd say you need the reroll. Seriously, one retard actually hoped the state would form a militia to kill the military police...I mean what the fuck??

SSguy

12-21-2008, 04:07 AM

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=6bVa6jn4rpE

Yep, sure it does.

The police of any country have never been misused right? They have never individually, abused their power right?

Please tell me thats a joke.......the guy makes an attempt to escape, and then does not stop struggling after hes taken down.

THEN he is fucking told he will be tazed if he does not stop struggling. Sorry man, if the police tell you they are going to taze you if you don't stop resisting arrest, you have no case to argue. If they tazed you when they told you they wouldn't then you do.

Quite fankly, the tart is lucky he was even warned at all.

If he has a problem with the arrest and wants to dispute it, WHEN you are being arrested is NOT the time and place to do that. Not like hes gonna magically disappear after hes put into the police car and driven down to the station.

Edit:
Watched it again, you guys realize the moron wasn't being arrested until he started resisting right? As soon as they started to lead him away he assumed he was being arrested and then started resisting the removal. None of that drama he pulled was needed.

TheLeprachaun

12-21-2008, 04:15 AM

Please tell me thats a joke.......the guy makes an attempt to escape, and then does not stop struggling after hes taken down.

THEN he is fucking told he will be tazed if he does not stop struggling. Sorry man, if the police tell you they are going to taze you if you don't stop resisting arrest, you have no case to argue. If they tazed you when they told you they wouldn't then you do.

Quite fankly, the tart is lucky he was even warned at all.

If he has a problem with the arrest and wants to dispute it, WHEN you are being arrested is NOT the time and place to do that. Not like hes gonna magically disappear after hes put into the police car and driven down to the station.

Edit:
Watched it again, you guys realize the moron wasn't being arrested until he started resisting right? As soon as they started to lead him away he assumed he was being arrested and then started resisting the removal. None of that drama he pulled was needed.

He wasn't resisting arrest because they weren't trying to arrest him at first.

Vessol

12-21-2008, 04:16 AM

Don't taze me bro!

Fluffington

12-21-2008, 04:39 AM

look at the evidence and look at the facts that have been cropping up more and more lately, I'm no conspiracy theorist I'm a realist and no I'm not going to bother arguing with people like you because you won't believe it's happening until your seeing military walking down your street and knocking on your door, or in the more likely case, kicking it down.

Next time use more periods and less bullshit.

Maybe it's because I live in Canada and we have a very liberal governement, but I don't see these dots you are putting together.

And you claim to be a realist, well no shit. You are not going to admit to being insane and paranoid, you obviously don't think you are. I say there is nothing to fear from my government. We almost had a coalition government and we still may, that means the parties in my government want power, not a police state.

You need to take a step back, history says that this sort of change would probably be taken during a major crisis, especially economical. Those problems cause civil unrest, which leads to change. Right now you guys are heading towards a depression, but I doubt the government is going to suddenly go into a police state for a little more power.

You already have massive military spending and several on going external wars, you could not possibly control the obvious problems like militias. The last time the US won a war was in WW2 because they cannot occupy countries properly, why would their own country be any different?

Everto

12-21-2008, 05:00 AM

You guys must remember, there isn't enough military to spread around all of United States.

For every soldier, there's about 5 more citizens that can wield a gun. Not efficiently, but they can do it. If America really wanted to take over the populace, they'd need another way of doing it. How is this?

They'd have to slowly ease us into it... they'd have to slowly take away our rights, and slowly use the military so we can get used to it. They'd throw things in our water, and our food so we lose our sense of patriotism and our sense of liberty. The real strength of true populace control is not by force but by consumption.

The military couldn't take over America without the use of Nuclear Weapons even if every single soldier tried.

tallefred

12-21-2008, 05:05 AM

Everto

12-21-2008, 05:14 AM

I'm not so sure Everto. Most people would be too scared to fight. I just think if they did that Russia and China would WTFPWN them, and they know it. If they just sneak it in they can do it without weakening themselves in the process.

I believe that in due circumstances, sense will become of most of the citizens. Most of them have a "won't believe it 'till I see it" attitude. I think the killing of innocent civilians/peaceful protesters will add a good ten people to the "Alert" status.

But yes, I'm aware Russia and China will probably jump on us, and probably kill us off. That'll be something for the history books, but that won't mean I won't fight them either.

Either way, if any soldier is acting in such a way that would be found... unconstitutional that I'd say, perhaps of said crimes such as rape or cold blooded murder. Then they are an enemy, just as would be the Reds.

tallefred

12-21-2008, 05:17 AM

I believe that in due circumstances, sense will become of most of the citizens. Most of them have a "won't believe it 'till I see it" attitude. I think the killing of innocent civilians/peaceful protesters will add a good ten people to the "Alert" status.

But yes, I'm aware Russia and China will probably jump on us, and probably kill us off. That'll be something for the history books, but that won't mean I won't fight them either.

Either way, if any soldier is acting in such a way that would be found... unconstitutional that I'd say, perhaps of said crimes such as rape or cold blooded murder. Then they are an enemy, just as would be the Reds.

Either way right now we're just hypothesizing and I've gone way beyond my usual allowance of tinfoil. I'm done for the night.

Everto

12-21-2008, 05:24 AM

Either way right now we're just hypothesizing and I've gone way beyond my usual allowance of tinfoil. I'm done for the night.

At least I've got a friend in you.
:ohno:

Ozzy Wrong

12-21-2008, 05:44 AM

I don't remember posting in this thread...

Everto

12-21-2008, 06:03 AM

I don't remember posting in this thread...

You wore too much tinfoil and it cut off your brain circulation.

heroshade

12-21-2008, 07:23 AM

You wore too much tinfoil and it cut off your brain circulation.

I have an idea. We don't just make tinfoil helmets. We make tinfoil ARMOR!! Their bullets won't be able to stand up to our godliness!!!

Silverhandorder

12-21-2008, 08:29 AM

We are on a curve. Right now there is too much resources available and population is enjoying easy times. Because of this no one gives a shit since their life is still relatively easy. As soon as we start to run out of resources shit will change fast.

Vanno

12-21-2008, 08:46 AM

For every soldier, there's about 5 more citizens that can wield a gun. Not efficiently, but they can do it. If America really wanted to take over the populace, they'd need another way of doing it. How is this?

I don't even need to know the exact number to tell you that your math isn't even close. The number is probably between 50-100 gun owners per active duty military personnel.

Everto

12-21-2008, 09:40 AM

I don't even need to know the exact number to tell you that your math isn't even close. The number is probably between 50-100 gun owners per active duty military personnel.

I tried. I didnt wanna be TOO wrong.

Fuzzball

12-23-2008, 12:02 AM

No wonder we have lost so many of our freedoms and protections already with the rampant ignorance and apathy displayed here. Patriot act, Abu Gharib, Guantanamo, second amendment used as toilet paper, secret prisons accross the world, suspension of Habeus corpus for US citizens, telecommuncations immunity for spying on us, secret wiretaps with warrants, fourth amendment violations everywhere, Posse comitatatus and insurrection act amended and ignored etc.

Benjamin Franklin said : Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.

Edmund Burke said : All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

I am sorry that you like the idea of having your children get run over by a drunk driver, which could have been prevented if a military blockade was there to stop them...these military personnel aren't violating your rights, nor are they authorized to use lethal weapons if you do not comply...they are normal people like everyone else, except they are fighting for a cause much greater than anything we civilians can muster up.

If the government was attempting to enslave everyone, do you possibly believe those individual soldiers and Marines are going to comply to orders like that? No, they have the same mentallity that we do (they aren't robots). Gain some common sense please.

Also, you are contradicting yourself by stating the Bengamin Franklin quote...according to you, isn't the government making the decisions for us, not society?

The Edmund Burke quote doesn't apply either since you aren't doing anything about it. All you are doing is arguing on some forum made for a video game so that you can sit back in your chair and pat yourself on the back for thinking you just made an intelligent statement. You can be proud of yourself all you want, but don't expect others to be proud of you until you actually act on your beliefs, not just talk about them.

Jezrith

12-23-2008, 12:20 AM

I am sorry that you like the idea of having your children get run over by a drunk driver, which could have been prevented if a military blockade was there to stop them...

I'm sorry you like the idea of military policing a civilian population because of some bullshit emotional plea. "It's for the children. Wahhhhh!"

these military personnel aren't violating your rights, nor are they authorized to use lethal weapons if you do not comply...they are normal people like everyone else, except they are fighting for a cause much greater than anything we civilians can muster up.

The military is a fucking death machine, that is what it's supposed to be, it's not a civilian police force. If you had ever served in the military you would know the difference.

If the government was attempting to enslave everyone, do you possibly believe those soldiers and Marines are going to comply to orders like that?

Some would, some wouldn't. Again, if you ever served you would already know this.

No, they have the same mentallity that we do.

No, they don't. They are trained specifically not too. They are trained to kill and die without hesitation, that's as far from a normal mentality as you can get.

Gain some common sense please.

You have exhibited zero knowledge of the subject nor any common sense, get a clue sheep.

Ok...so its legal....they aren't making arrests...all they are doing is observing.....where is the problem again?
Lets go over this again...they aren't making arrests, them standing there isn't illegal.....so at what point do they become a police force??

They aren't just standing observing genius, they are actively making the stops. Don't tell me you are so clueless that you don't know the difference between a stop and an arrest.

I think you are just angry because you like driving drunk like a moron, or maybe you are one of those people who hate authority no matter what.

You only think this because you are clueless.

tallefred

12-23-2008, 12:23 AM

I am sorry that you like the idea of having your children get run over by a drunk driver, which could have been prevented if a military blockade was there to stop them...these military personnel aren't violating your rights, nor are they authorized to use lethal weapons if you do not comply...they are normal people like everyone else, except they are fighting for a cause much greater than anything we civilians can muster up.

If the government was attempting to enslave everyone, do you possibly believe those soldiers and Marines are going to comply to orders like that? No, they have the same mentallity that we do. Gain some common sense please.

Also, you are controdicting yourself by stating the Bengamin Franklin quote...according to you, isn't the government making the decisions for us, not society?

Why are military police being used? There is no reason for it, I'm sure the regular cops can operate a roadblock on their own. What the fuck reason is there for military personnel working as police.

We're being desensitized. Don't be a fucking idiot, there is NO REASON that these MPs need to be there other than to get used to the idea. It's not a military blockade, it's a police blockade- by the military.

Fuzzball

12-23-2008, 12:39 AM

Why are military police being used? There is no reason for it, I'm sure the regular cops can operate a roadblock on their own. What the fuck reason is there for military personnel working as police.

We're being desensitized. Don't be a fucking idiot, there is NO REASON that these MPs need to be there other than to get used to the idea. It's not a military blockade, it's a police blockade- by the military.

Their are hundreds of reasons why the military could be out there. Perhaps looking for someone, perhaps gaining experience/training, or even just looking for something to do (it is not uncommon for officers in the military to send people out to do useless crap due to lack of work). The fact that you are a conspiracy theorist tells me a lot about you. I wouldn't doubt it if you were a pothead too.

Fuzzball

12-23-2008, 12:52 AM

I'm sorry you like the idea of military policing a civilian population because of some bullshit emotional plea. "It's for the children. Wahhhhh!"

The military is here to protect us, and our freedoms. I see no problem with them helping the local police...if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about. That means you better leave your stach of marijuana back at home, buddy.

The military is a fucking death machine, that is what it's supposed to be, it's not a civilian police force. If you had ever served in the military you would know the difference.

LOL!!!! The military is not just a machine used for war. I won't bother explaining this though, other than to say, "if you were in the military, you would know the difference."

Some would, some wouldn't. Again, if you ever served you would already know this.

That's not something that needs to be taught to you in the military for you to understand...MOST would not follow such orders, I have a brother in the Marines, he is not the sterotypical brainwashed Marine that you claim them to be. That's very ignorant of you.

No, they don't. They are trained specifically not too. They are trained to kill and die without hesitation, that's as far from a normal mentality as you can get.

Also a very ignorant statement...they are trained to use a weapon, and to do as they are told...but even then, their is a line that can be crossed where most would be intelligent enough to determine if the order is bad or not. Not to mention they are also given permission to deny any order that they feel is not right. Also, I'm pretty sure my brother wouldn't go step on a landmine if he was ordered too, but maybe you would...can't wait!

You have exhibited zero knowledge of the subject nor any common sense, get a clue sheep.

What knowledge or common sense on the subject have you displayed here? Absolutely none. Please go back to playing World Of Warcraft where you belong.

Don't bother replying to this, I am done reading about your stupidity for one night.

tallefred

12-23-2008, 01:35 AM

The military is here to protect us, and our freedoms. I see no problem with them helping the local police...if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about. That means you better leave your stach of marijuana back at home, buddy.

The military has a very specific job. They kill people who threaten the U.S. They are not a police force. They shouldn't be used as one. If they are being used as one there is a reason.

LOL!!!! The military is not just a machine used for war. I won't bother explaining this though, other than to say, "if you were in the military, you would know the difference."

You are indeed correct. The military is an organization dedicated to the establishment and maintenance of zoos. GTFO.

That's not something that needs to be taught to you in the military for you to understand...MOST would not follow such orders, I have a brother in the Marines, he is not the sterotypical brainwashed Marine that you claim them to be. That's very ignorant of you.

The military is trained to follow orders no matter what. This is because if they made a rational decision about everything they were told to do, no one would ever do anything. You are aware they are told to shoot people and get shot at for some reason they likely do not know, right? This is a necessary thing for the Army, but not for police, which is why they aren't supposed to be used as such.

Also a very ignorant statement...they are trained to use a weapon, and to do as they are told...but even then, their is a line that can be crossed where most would be intelligent enough to determine if the order is bad or not. Not to mention they are also given permission to deny any order that they feel is not right. Also, I'm pretty sure my brother wouldn't go step on a landmine if he was ordered too, but maybe you would...can't wait!

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

'Nuff fucking said.

What knowledge or common sense on the subject have you displayed here? Absolutely none. Please go back to playing World Of Warcraft where you belong.

No u.

Don't bother replying to this, I am done reading about your stupidity for one night.

I don't care if you read this or not, other people read these forums besides you.

Colors removed to preserve my sanity.

Jezrith

12-23-2008, 01:36 AM

The military is here to protect us, and our freedoms. I see no problem with them helping the local police...

They military is here to execute war, they are not a "protection" force.

if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about. That means you better leave your stach of marijuana back at home, buddy.

You really are a sheltered little boy who doesn't know much about the real world, aren't you. These people had nothing to hide, but they had plenty to worry about.

http://www.cato.org/raidmap/

The military has even lower standard of evidence than civilian police force.

LOL!!!! The military is not just a machine used for war. I won't bother explaining this though, other than to say, "if you were in the military, you would know the difference."

I know exactly what they are trained for, how they are trained and what the purpose of a solider is. I know this because I was in the military, son. I served in the Army, what branch did you serve in?

That's not something that needs to be taught to you in the military for you to understand...MOST would not follow such orders, I have a brother in the Marines, he is not the sterotypical brainwashed Marine that you claim them to be. That's very ignorant of you.

Whoppity-do, you have a brother in the Marines! Yea for you, I guess that means you know what you are talking about. Oh wait, no it doesn't. Having actually been in the military I know that plenty would follow their orders. Any disobedience towards a lawful order is met with a hash response, soldiers are trained to follow orders first, and question their legality second, if at all.

Also a very ignorant statement...they are trained to use a weapon, and to do as they are told...but even then, their is a line that can be crossed where most would be intelligent enough to determine if the order is bad or not. Not to mention they are also given permission to deny any order that they feel is not right.

Determine if the order is "bad" or not? They can deny any order they "feel" is not "right"?:lmao: Oh you are fucking killing me, seriously. I'm laughing my ass off right now. But please go on and demonstrate even more how ignorant you are of the UCMJ and it's section on dereliction of duty.

Also, I'm pretty sure my brother wouldn't go step on a landmine if he was ordered too, but maybe you would...can't wait!

He nor I would ever receive such an order. But, he might receive an order to run through an unmarked mine field to take and hold a position and if he is any where close to a decent soldier he would do it without hesitation. Just the same as if he was order to fire on an angry mob of people, he would do that as well. If he didn't, then he is a pretty shitty soldier. This happens to be the main reason using a military force as a police force is dangerous to a free society. Of course, it's obvious you don't like free societies. Perhaps you should move to China, you could jerk off to union of the military and police forces all day long over there.

What knowledge or common sense on the subject have you displayed here? Absolutely none.

I demonstrated the knowledge and common sense that comes from actually having been a soldier, something you obviously know nothing about.

Please go back to playing World Of Warcraft where you belong.

Really? You thought that was witty enough to actually post? Wow. Not only are you clueless on this subject you have the wit of a fucking tree stump.

Don't bother replying to this, I am done reading about your stupidity for one night.

Scamper along sonny, just like most clueless twits do when they have no idea what they are talking about. Maybe one day you will take your clueless and sheltered ass out into the world and actually learn something about it, instead of just pretending you do on a forum.

SSguy

12-23-2008, 01:46 AM

They military is here to execute war, they are not a "protection" force.

I guess Peacekeepers and military police are meant to kill....yup. lmao.
:lmao:

I almost wish it was a military coup to exterminate civilians, mainly because the odds of you and other retards dying in some act of sheer stupidity would skyrocket.

But no, I wouldn't be surprised if you even lived in the country, like lethn over there, who is going apeshit over this, but lives in the UK where he thinks all those public cameras are for "speed" and claims the population would riot if something like this happened there when they have had their guns taken away.

Thats kinda funny tho, they are making stops but can't and are not making arrests.......that makes no sense whatsoever unless there are civilian police there, which is fine.

Scamper along sonny, just like most clueless twits do when they have no idea what they are talking about. Maybe one day you will take your clueless and sheltered ass out into the world and actually learn something about it, instead of just pretending you do on a forum.

Um no, actually most ppl of these forums stop arguing because the opposite side is a complete moron and a waste of time. You, lethn, and talle happen to be both.

Was there even any proof of freedoms being violated? Its not worth the time looking back to see if any of you twats posted anything.

tallefred

12-23-2008, 01:58 AM

I guess Peacekeepers and military police are meant to kill....yup. lmao.
:lmao:

I almost wish it was a military coup to exterminate civilians, mainly because the odds of you and other retards dying in some act of sheer stupidity would skyrocket.

But no, I wouldn't be surprised if you even lived in the country, like lethn over there, who is going apeshit over this, but lives in the UK where he thinks all those public cameras are for "speed" and claims the population would riot if something like this happened there when they have had their guns taken away.

Thats kinda funny tho, they are making stops but can't and are not making arrests.......that makes no sense whatsoever unless there are civilian police there, which is fine.

What is being gained by them using the military in these roadblocks? Can't the police handle blocking traffic themselves? Isn't it the cops job, not the military's?

The government is taking more and more control. This country started as a place where the government had almost no power whatsoever. They (the founders) added to it to bring it to where they felt it needed to be, and that's where it should have stayed.

There is a reason the military isn't meant to be used this way. The people doing this KNOW that it isn't, and they've been very careful not to let the MPs make arrests BECAUSE IT'S FUCKING ILLEGAL. They've got a nice little loopholes which allows them to station them there. Why are they being stationed there if they're not doing anything?

I think we're being desensitized to the idea of the military being used as police. You can draw your own conclusions, but a year from now you'll be saying "What's wrong with using the military as police, they made an amendment which makes it ok!"

Nevron

12-23-2008, 02:11 AM

Whoppity-do, you have a brother in the Marines! Yea for you, I guess that means you know what you are talking about. Oh wait, no it doesn't. Having actually been in the military I know that plenty would follow their orders. Any disobedience towards a lawful order is met with a hash response, soldiers are trained to follow orders first, and question their legality second, if at all.

I disagree with your final statement here. Not sure about you, but I was trained to obey lawful orders. They put emphasis on lawful, and in doing so imply that one should disobey if they determine the order to be unlawful. Pending on the severity, carrying out an unlawful order can have harsher consequences than disobeying a lawful order that you wrongfully question as unlawful.

Jezrith

12-23-2008, 02:25 AM

I guess Peacekeepers and military police are meant to kill....yup.

Says the guy who has obviously never been in the military a day in his life. I never thought you would be a sucker for politically correct word games. LOL Peacekeeprs :lmao: .... Like all soldiers in the military, M.P.s are soldiers first and police officer second and a soldiers job is to kill. This is basic shit, even in Combat Medic school they teach you to be a soldier first and an EMT second. Even though your MOS is save people's lives, you are still a soldier and as such you are still expected to kill.

Also, look at how bad of a clusterfuck these "Peace Keeping" missions turn into, that is even more of reason why they shouldn't be considered a "protection force".

I almost wish it was a military coup to exterminate civilians, mainly because the odds of you and other retards dying in some act of sheer stupidity would skyrocket.

More proof that the world needs less statist boot-lickers like yourself.

But no, I wouldn't be surprised if you even lived in the country, like lethn over there, who is going apeshit over this, but lives in the UK where he thinks all those public cameras are for "speed" and claims the population would riot if something like this happened there when they have had their guns taken away.

What the fuck are you talking about? In the future, please try and make coherent statements.

Thats kinda funny tho, they are making stops but can't and are not making arrests.......that makes no sense whatsoever unless there are civilian police there, which is fine.

There were civilian police there, have you been drinking or something?

Um no, actually most ppl of these forums stop arguing because the opposite side is a complete moron and a waste of time. You, lethn, and talle happen to be both.

Not really, they usually scamper away because they got owned. I'm expecting you to be doing the same at any moment.

Was there even any proof of freedoms being violated?

Like that has anything to do with anything. The discuss is about using the military to do civilian police work, please keep up.

Jezrith

12-23-2008, 02:38 AM

I disagree with your final statement here. Not sure about you, but I was trained to obey lawful orders.

Yeah, that is why I mentioned "lawful" in my post.

They put emphasis on lawful, and in doing so imply that one should disobey if they determine the order to be unlawful.

Correct, it is implied which means it is secondary. They spent about two full days covering UCMJ, about 15 minutes of that was covering what "lawful" means. It was quite obvious that the priority is 1- "follow orders" 2- "question their lawfulness".

Pending on the severity, carrying out an unlawful order can have harsher consequences than disobeying a lawful order that you wrongfully question as unlawful.

Oh no doubt. But at the same time are you a JAG? Are most 11-Bravos? Most of these guys are not going to have any idea whether most orders are lawful or not. Some are obvious, like not wasting a school room full of children. Some are not, like the handling of prisoners and interrogation methods. If you disobey any direct order, especially during war time, you are going to be Court Marshaled and you better have a waterproof case because, unless you are dealing with a Mi Li incident you are probably going to lose.

Fuzzball

12-23-2008, 02:46 AM

Yeah, that is why I mentioned "lawful" in my post.

Correct, it is implied which means it is secondary. They spent about two full days covering UCMJ, about 15 minutes of that was covering what "lawful" means. It was quite obvious that the priority is 1- "follow orders" 2- "question their lawfulness".

Oh no doubt. But at the same time are you a JAG? Are most 11-Bravos? Most of these guys are not going to have any idea whether most orders are lawful or not. Some are obvious, like not wasting a school room full of children. Some are not, like the handling of prisoners and interrogation methods. If you disobey any direct order, especially during war time, you are going to be Court Marshaled and you better have a waterproof case because, unless you are dealing with a Mi Li incident you are probably going to lose.

Your post count reflects how much of a troll you are. I have reported you, and hopefully the moderators will settle this situation.

tallefred

12-23-2008, 02:52 AM

Your post count reflects how much of a troll you are. I have reported you, and hopefully the moderators will settle this situation.

You reported someone for having a discussion you were on the other side of. What. The. Fuck.

Jezrith

12-23-2008, 02:54 AM

Your post count reflects how much of a troll you are. I have reported you, and hopefully the moderators will settle this situation.

Awww, poor little fella, he is sicking the mods after me... :ohno: Trust me, I haven't violated a single thing on the TOS. But feel free to go cry to the mods, in over 7000 posts I have only received one infraction. I think it's safe to say I know where the line is better than you.

You reported someone for having a discussion you were on the other side of. What. The. Fuck.

Indeed, and he is the one telling me to "Go back to World of Warcraft".... bahahahah!!! :lmao:

Nevron

12-23-2008, 02:57 AM

Correct, it is implied which means it is secondary. They spent about two full days covering UCMJ, about 15 minutes of that was covering what "lawful" means. It was quite obvious that the priority is 1- "follow orders" 2- "question their lawfulness".

Implied doesn't necessarily mean secondary, and it definitely doesn't mean shoot first and ask questions later. I said implied, but I've heard both implied and specified.

Oh no doubt. But at the same time are you a JAG? Are most 11-Bravos? Most of these guys are not going to have any idea whether most orders are lawful or not. Some are obvious, like not wasting a school room full of children. Some are not, like the handling of prisoners and interrogation methods. If you disobey any direct order, especially during war time, you are going to be Court Marshaled and you better have a waterproof case because, unless you are dealing with a Mi Li incident you are probably going to lose.

I agree for the most part, but I'd say that quite often common sense and rationality are decent enough guidelines unless it's extremely vague or questionable, such as your former examples. Typically those who handle prisoners are trained to do such, same applies for interrogators - especially for interrogators. On that note, I realize you were just providing examples, and I understand your point. That's exactly why I urge people to do their fair share of studying of laws pertaining to situations they could end up in in a military environment.

I guess in the end we mostly agree on that topic, just from a slightly different stand-point.

tallefred

12-23-2008, 02:58 AM

Indeed, and he is the one telling me to "Go back to World of Warcraft".... bahahahah!!! :lmao:

Really symbolizes the problem with our country... "I can't defend myself, I need a mod/cop/law to do it for me!"

Killuminati

12-23-2008, 03:00 AM

a lot of really pathetic simpletons in this thread.

tallefred

12-23-2008, 03:01 AM

Implied doesn't necessarily mean secondary, and it definitely doesn't mean shoot first and ask questions later. I said implied, but I've heard both implied and specified.

I agree for the most part, but I'd say that quite often common sense and rationality are decent enough guidelines unless it's extremely vague or questionable, such as your former examples. Typically those who handle prisoners are trained to do such, same applies for interrogators - especially for interrogators. On that note, I realize you were just providing examples, and I understand your point. That's exactly why I urge people to do their fair share of studying of laws pertaining to situations they could end up in in a military environment.

I guess in the end we mostly agree on that topic, just from a slightly different stand-point.

A problem with being able to disobey an unlawful order is what exactly constitutes unlawful? If the Greek military were brought in to stop the riots going on over there, is that unlawful?

Military should not be used for policing purposes, period.

Bissen

12-23-2008, 03:02 AM

What is being gained by them using the military in these roadblocks? Can't the police handle blocking traffic themselves? Isn't it the cops job, not the military's?

The government is taking more and more control. This country started as a place where the government had almost no power whatsoever. They (the founders) added to it to bring it to where they felt it needed to be, and that's where it should have stayed.

There is a reason the military isn't meant to be used this way. The people doing this KNOW that it isn't, and they've been very careful not to let the MPs make arrests BECAUSE IT'S FUCKING ILLEGAL. They've got a nice little loopholes which allows them to station them there. Why are they being stationed there if they're not doing anything?

I think we're being desensitized to the idea of the military being used as police. You can draw your own conclusions, but a year from now you'll be saying "What's wrong with using the military as police, they made an amendment which makes it ok!"

SLAM!
/hits nail on the head.

If people can't see that the military is being used in roadblocks only to let the American people get used to the idea of it. Well then fuck you.

Military is military. Police is police. Wanna do more effective roadblocks? Hire more police.

Enough of your silly excuses.

And whoaaa. This thread went places.

Jezrith

12-23-2008, 03:03 AM

Implied doesn't necessarily mean secondary, and it definitely doesn't mean shoot first and ask questions later. I said implied, but I've heard both implied and specified.

Well, just the basic fact that it is not good for a military when you have soldiers questioning orders, makes me say it's secondary. But you are right, I don't mean secondary in the sense of shoot first ask questions later, I mean it in the sense that when you are told to jump, you're first reaction is going to be jump rather than wonder if you should be jumping. In obvious cases it's easy to think "wait a minute", but in gray areas not so much. In the case of a "lawfully" declared marshal law scenario, I see a whole lot of gray there.

I guess in the end we mostly agree on that topic, just from a slightly different stand-point.

I would agree with that, but would also like to add what is lawful, isn't always what is right. ;)

Nevron

12-23-2008, 03:08 AM

A problem with being able to disobey an unlawful order is what exactly constitutes unlawful? If the Greek military were brought in to stop the riots going on over there, is that unlawful?

Military should not be used for policing purposes, period.

I'm not Greek and not versed in Greek laws. I wasn't arguing for or against using the military as a police force, I was discussing the discrepancies of obeying/disobeying lawful and unlawful orders with Jezrith.

Well, just the basic fact that it is not good for a military when you have soldiers questioning orders, makes me say it's secondary. But you are right, I don't mean secondary in the sense of shoot first ask questions later, I mean it in the sense that when you are told to jump, you're first reaction is going to be jump rather than wonder if you should be jumping. In obvious cases it's easy to think "wait a minute", but in gray areas not so much. In the case of a "lawfully" declared marshal law scenario, I see a whole lot of gray there.

I would agree with that, but would also like to add what is lawful, isn't always what is right. ;)

Just a misinterpretation of 'secondary' on my part then. I agree with the grey area and your final statement. Definitely no argument there.