The Wording of the 2nd Amendment...I wish it was different

[Bobson]

Posted by Carl N. Brown:


"If an order was issued by the president to begin the process of confiscating private arms, do you believe the military would carry out this order?"

I have posed this question to a number of military personnel, officers mainly, and to a man they have echoed that such an order would not carry the weight of law and would in fact, be an illegal order based upon their oath of enlistment as well as the oath taken by the president. A few did say that they felt some in the military would be willing to carry out the order, younger enlisted types, but most of the officer core they felt would not. Let's all hope they're right.

That's total BS, and irrelevant either way, as it's nothing more than opinion. Also, the entire final paragraph just screams, "I have absolutely no idea how the military works or functions." I guaran-damn-tee you if the order came down from the CiC, the military would carry it out. Whether or not military members would be happy about it is another thing entirely, but how they would feel about it really doesn't make any difference.

 

[SouthernBoy]

That's total BS, and irrelevant either way, as it's nothing more than opinion. Also, the entire final paragraph just screams, "I have absolutely no idea how the military works or functions." I guaran-damn-tee you if the order came down from the CiC, the military would carry it out. Whether or not military members would be happy about it is another thing entirely, but how they would feel about it really doesn't make any difference.

I might remind you, not my words.... theirs. You can argue with them.

 

[Neverwinter]

That's total BS, and irrelevant either way, as it's nothing more than opinion. Also, the entire final paragraph just screams, "I have absolutely no idea how the military works or functions." I guaran-damn-tee you if the order came down from the CiC, the military would carry it out. Whether or not military members would be happy about it is another thing entirely, but how they would feel about it really doesn't make any difference.

The assessment also ignores the evidence from experiments like the Stanford Prison Experiment and Milgram's experiments on obedience to authority. It's easy for them to delude themselves when being asked the question, but the truth will come out at the event.

 

[Bobson]

It's easy for them to delude themselves when being asked the question, but the truth will come out at the event.

Well, you're right about that.

Having been in the military, I can say firsthand that more often than not, officers and enlisted members see eye to eye on things. Despite the whole "no fraternization" rule between officers and enlisted, one would find that in many cases, officers and enlisted members are together outside of work almost as much as in the workplace. In my experience at least (and the Air Force may be an exception to the rule - I can't speak for the other branches), entire units are generally really buddy-buddy, usually up to the Majors (O-4). That being said, when an order comes down, it's carried out; no ifs, ands, or buts. If you disagree with it, fine, deal with it after the fact.

Ironically, officers have their careers on the line in a bigger way than enlisted members; enlisted members are often given piles of administrative paperwork and writes-up before being given severe punishment. On the other hand, officers can make relatively minor lapses in judgement, and they can see their careers destroyed. They know it, and they ensure that if there's a broken link somewhere in the line as far as following orders, it's almost never at the officer level. Yeah, the old adage is true: Crap rolls downhill. Most of the time, it's because it started at the lowest level, not at the top. And yeah, I'm sure there are exceptions. I'm just speaking from my experience.