Re: Risk analysis

["Steve Allison" <Steven.Allison () cox net>]

The military and law enforcement may end up having an horrifying dilemma.
When they took the oath of enlistment (military and law enforcement), as I
did, they swore to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States
against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and
allegiance to the same." But in the next breath, we had to say, "I will obey
the orders of the President of the United States and the officers appointed
above me." Could be a terrible dichotomy for our military.

That said, if the US federal government attempted to revoke our 2nd
Amendment rights, what would the US military and law enforcement community
do (federal down to Local police)? Most folks just seem to think that our
federal government can make an order, and our military and law enforcement
follows it to the letter. They've never tried to pass a law (or lawful
order) that removes the constitutional rights these guys fight for. 

Keep that in mind. I don't count on our government to use common sense but I
do believe in our military, and they will follow the protection of a 200+
year oath to protect our way of life rather than the orders of a guy who
will be out of office in a few years. 

Too optimistic?

Steve   



-----Original Message-----
From: funsec-bounces () linuxbox org [mailto:funsec-bounces () linuxbox org] On
Behalf Of Jeffrey Walton
Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 8:13 AM
To: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Cc: funsec () linuxbox org; rmslade () shaw ca
Subject: Re: [funsec] Risk analysis

On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 10:16 AM,  <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> wrote:
> On Sat, 11 May 2013 19:04:03 -0400, Jeffrey Walton said:
> > When I lived in Georgia in the 1990s, one of its counties passed an 
> > ordnance requiring all citizens own a gun. Around the same time, a 
> > county in Chicago passed a ordinance banning guns. Do you want to 
> > take a guess at which county experienced an increase in crime, and 
> > which experienced a decrease?
>
> Multiple studies have shows that access to guns is only one very small 
> part of what drives the *reported* crime rate. Economic and 
> educational conditions in the area, and the resident's relationship 
> with the police, have a much higher impact on how many crimes get
committed, and how many get reported.
> > Anyway, the debate is not a religion to me as long as I can own one 
> > to rise against the government if needed.
>
> Oh, bother.  If more of the "rise against the government if needed" 
> crowd was realistic about that, we could actually have rational 
> discussions about gun control.
Sometimes the threat of action is more compelling than the act  itself (Sun
Tzu).

> There's a whole lot more to doing an effective resistance than just "I 
> have a gun".  But except for some militia groups that actually train, 
> none of the "rise against the government" crowd want to admit it.
Yes, you're right. There are better ways to approach that problem
(http://www.aeinstein.org).

> Remember - if it comes to that, you're going against people who do 
> that shit day in day out for a living.  And yet, mandating a tour in 
> the National Guard so people have seen it and learned it *before* the 
> bullets start flying doesn't go over very well with the gun-rights 
> crew (who see any sort of mandatory training requirement as an
infringement).
Right. There are better ways to approach that problem
(http://www.aeinstein.org).

The citizens, the military, and law enforcement are all victims of the same
hypocrisy. There's no reason that they should fight amongst themselves.

Jeff
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.


_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.