1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Is prior military service a good indicator of RKBA activism?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by horge, Jun 17, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. horge

    horge Member

    Aug 23, 2003

    What the thread title says:
    Is prior military service a good indicator of RKBA activism?
    I wonder how it is over there in the United States. I suspect it is no indicator
    at all, but would like some input, nonetheless.

    Over on this side of the great urinal, prior military service is a predominantly
    negative indicator for KBA support. A law enforcement background is an
    even more severely negative indicator. I'm thinking that since we have no
    RKBA here, our servicemen and women aren't swearing to support KBA
    when they promise to defend the Philippine Constitution.

  2. jeepmor

    jeepmor Member

    Nov 6, 2005
    GW Bush and John Kerry both served in the military. And both support AWB, so my answer would be NO.
  3. U.S.SFC_RET

    U.S.SFC_RET Member

    Dec 5, 2005
    The Old Dominion State
    Traditionally speaking most military active duty and veterans DO support The Right to Keep and Bear Arms.. Most Law enforcement support the right to keep and bear firearms. Big City, inner city is another matter altogether. City writes their paycheck and you don't bite the hand that feeds you in that case.
    In politics the higher you get in office the more your ideals have to change or you find yourself out of office quick. Big City plitics included. Some people couldn't pass the common sense test if they walked by it.
    If you can be so adamant about supporting the AWB then post a big sign on your front lawn about it. (Write very proudly) that this household is totally against the use of any firearm. Show your support for all to see.
  4. DKSuddeth

    DKSuddeth Member

    Feb 19, 2006
    Bedford, TX
    most former military are firm supporters of the 2nd. the only ones i've met that tend to not support have been high ranking officers (generally flag or bird) or highly populated urban chiefs and leos.
  5. alucard0822

    alucard0822 Member

    Jan 3, 2007
    Westminster, MD
    The vast majority of service men and women that swear an oath to protect and defend the United States and the Constitution keep to their word. In fact the very foundations of duty, patriotism and honor that would make one more inclined to serve, and the sense of self reliance, knowledge of weapons and defensive/offensive tactics that are gained through service all lead if not to activism, at least to personal support for the RKBA.

    Its unfortunate some of the higher ups and many who enter politics seem to forsake these ideals for the sake of "compromise" and to further their political career.
  6. jsebens

    jsebens Member

    Mar 9, 2006
    Most of the people I see in the Army are divided on the subject. I see junior officers who agree with the 2nd Amendment, and I know at least one lieutenant who thinks that the USA should ban all firearms from anyone other than military and LEOs. Enlisted men typically support it, NCOs are divided, and senior officers typically disagree with it.

    At the end of the day, it's a crapshoot. YMMV.
  7. Lone_Gunman

    Lone_Gunman Member

    Dec 24, 2002
    United Socialist States of Obama
    I think most citizens in general support the right to keep and bear arms, whether they are military or not.

    In my opinion military and law enforcement personell tend to follow orders, whatever those orders may be. During Hurricane Katrina, they were ordered to confiscate weapons, and that is what they did. So while I dont doubt that many of those personell may have believed what they were doing was distasteful, and probably even illegal, they went ahead and it did it, using the excuse that they were "just following orders". There were intervies of National Guardsmen on CNN who said they couldn't believe what they were doing, and didnt think it could happen here, and yet they were participating in the disarmament of New Orleans citizens.

    Someone did a survey of military people a few years ago, and I forget the actual numbers, but I think about 50% said they would have no problem confiscating guns if ordered to do so.

    The founding fathers did not want us to have a standing army, and I think that is part of the reason why. British soldiers disarmed American colonials. Unfortunately, times have changed and we are now not just a nation, but a worldwide empire; not so much in the military sense as an economic sense. And you can't be an empire without a standing army to wage foreign wars.
  8. Art Eatman

    Art Eatman Administrator Staff Member

    Dec 22, 2002
    Terlingua, TX; Thomasville,GA
    The opening question somehow sees servicefolks as a completely separate class of people, and that just ain't so.

    There are as many divisions of thought within that group as within any group of whatever categorization: White/black/male/female/non-service/cops/doctors/lawyers/janitors/etc/etc...

    If somebody has something in the realm of hard data, however, feel free to restart a thread on the subject.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page