Minutemen?

[f6john]

Are we approaching a time when the country needs a civilian form of protection for the Constitution? The military swears allegiance to the Constitution but it is also controlled by politicians. There is also an aversion to seeing any military forces being used on our soil for obvious reasons. Our police forces are also controlled by local politicians.

We have a lot of Vets in our group and I’m wondering if you can see a situation developing in the future where men (and women) of good conscience would need to band together to protect the Constitution, the family and home from a movement out to destroy our way of life. Sounds extreme but I keep hearing some extreme ideas from the edges that keep getting more and more acceptance in our government and our media sources.

Protection of our Constitution and our families should far outweigh any political affiliations and ideology.

[Chrisj CMA]

Yes. I see the need and were dangerously close.

[Alien]

Multiple armed factions of civilians defending their point of view in the streets equals anarchy and civil war.

Group A rises up to defend the constitution.

Group B rises up to defend the constitution but disagrees with group A on a few key points.

Groups A and B end up attacking each other.

Group C just wants to live peacefully but now feel thast they have to defend themselves against groupd A and B, so they arm themselves also.

Group D, seeing Group C arming themselves, gets scared and attacks first, out of fear.

Rinse and repeat for groups e-z.  

Then Insurrection is declared andpolice as well as the actual military is sent in to fight groups A-Z.

Total chaos and destruction.  Mass death.  There would be no winners, only survivors.

Let's not do that.  Put the gun down.  Pick up a ballot and vote your concience.  

[old2soon]

       The Very WHY of the 2nd Amendment Of The Constitution of The United States of America. I took The Oath in Feb. 1964 and I Feel for me It IS Still in effect. I went to war for This Country in 1964. Might could have another one in me should the need arise. I also PRAY cooler heads will prevail. I'm READY which ever way the cards are dealt. RIDE SAFE.

[f6john]

Multiple armed factions of civilians defending their point of view in the streets equals anarchy and civil war.

Group A rises up to defend the constitution.

Group B rises up to defend the constitution but disagrees with group A on a few key points.

Groups A and B end up attacking each other.

Group C just wants to live peacefully but now feel thast they have to defend themselves against groupd A and B, so they arm themselves also.

Group D, seeing Group C arming themselves, gets scared and attacks first, out of fear.

Rinse and repeat for groups e-z.  

Then Insurrection is declared andpolice as well as the actual military is sent in to fight groups A-Z.

Total chaos and destruction.  Mass death.  There would be no winners, only survivors.

Let's not do that.  Put the gun down.  Pick up a ballot and vote your concience.  

Are you a veteran? Just asking as a point of reference. I take your points but as you know our voting is even coming under attack and voter participation is many times dismal. But under the circumstances we won’t be counting on you to stand for the Constitution or the family unit when “it” really hits the fan.

[Alien]

Multiple armed factions of civilians defending their point of view in the streets equals anarchy and civil war.

Group A rises up to defend the constitution.

Group B rises up to defend the constitution but disagrees with group A on a few key points.

Groups A and B end up attacking each other.

Group C just wants to live peacefully but now feel thast they have to defend themselves against groupd A and B, so they arm themselves also.

Group D, seeing Group C arming themselves, gets scared and attacks first, out of fear.

Rinse and repeat for groups e-z.  

Then Insurrection is declared andpolice as well as the actual military is sent in to fight groups A-Z.

Total chaos and destruction.  Mass death.  There would be no winners, only survivors.

Let's not do that.  Put the gun down.  Pick up a ballot and vote your concience.  

Are you a veteran? Just asking as a point of reference. I take your points but as you know our voting is even coming under attack and voter participation is many times dismal. But under the circumstances we won’t be counting on you to stand for the Constitution or the family unit when “it” really hits the fan.

I am not a military veteran. I did, however serve a two year term with AmeriCorps.  While I don't in any way equate the two, the concept of service is not lost on me.  At any rate, I'm not taking a political position on this issue, I'm just saying that if one group starts shooting, everybody starts shooting and then we're in a world of hurt.

[old2soon]

          Alien-as yer aware Both sides have Already started shooting. Deaths on both sides of the spectrum. grim reaper the Only winner when metal starts flyin. And I also KNOW there in no way on GODS green earth to recall a bullet after It's fired. RIDE SAFE.

[Jess from VA]

Dry run in VA this spring.  Thousands of veteran (and non veteran) patriots with loaded firearms acting nicely (this time).  Only one arrest (a dingbat).  Not one accidental (or intentional) discharge.











However, actually organizing (and operating) a small or large militia group of good men and women is harder than it looks.  There are going to be people you absolutely don't want, dying to join.  

The leftist BLM Antifa crowds aren't really very good at it either.  Though they've been getting some pretty good practice lately.  

[f6john]

Multiple armed factions of civilians defending their point of view in the streets equals anarchy and civil war.

Group A rises up to defend the constitution.

Group B rises up to defend the constitution but disagrees with group A on a few key points.

Groups A and B end up attacking each other.

Group C just wants to live peacefully but now feel thast they have to defend themselves against groupd A and B, so they arm themselves also.

Group D, seeing Group C arming themselves, gets scared and attacks first, out of fear.

Rinse and repeat for groups e-z.  

Then Insurrection is declared andpolice as well as the actual military is sent in to fight groups A-Z.

Total chaos and destruction.  Mass death.  There would be no winners, only survivors.

Let's not do that.  Put the gun down.  Pick up a ballot and vote your concience.  

Are you a veteran? Just asking as a point of reference. I take your points but as you know our voting is even coming under attack and voter participation is many times dismal. But under the circumstances we won’t be counting on you to stand for the Constitution or the family unit when “it” really hits the fan.

I am not a military veteran. I did, however serve a two year term with AmeriCorps.  While I don't in any way equate the two, the concept of service is not lost on me.  At any rate, I'm not taking a political position on this issue, I'm just saying that if one group starts shooting, everybody starts shooting and then we're in a world of hurt.

Just to clarify, you brought up armed conflict. Sometimes just being prepared and ready is all it takes to move the needle. Our military is for defense, not armed aggression and oppression. Same theory as “Minutemen”. I am familiar with radical militias and their pitfalls.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Multiple armed factions of civilians defending their point of view in the streets equals anarchy and civil war.

Group A rises up to defend the constitution.

Group B rises up to defend the constitution but disagrees with group A on a few key points.

Groups A and B end up attacking each other.

Group C just wants to live peacefully but now feel thast they have to defend themselves against groupd A and B, so they arm themselves also.

Group D, seeing Group C arming themselves, gets scared and attacks first, out of fear.

Rinse and repeat for groups e-z.  

Then Insurrection is declared andpolice as well as the actual military is sent in to fight groups A-Z.

Total chaos and destruction.  Mass death.  There would be no winners, only survivors.

Let's not do that.  Put the gun down.  Pick up a ballot and vote your concience.  

Are you a veteran? Just asking as a point of reference. I take your points but as you know our voting is even coming under attack and voter participation is many times dismal. But under the circumstances we won’t be counting on you to stand for the Constitution or the family unit when “it” really hits the fan.

I am not a military veteran. I did, however serve a two year term with AmeriCorps.  While I don't in any way equate the two, the concept of service is not lost on me.  At any rate, I'm not taking a political position on this issue, I'm just saying that if one group starts shooting, everybody starts shooting and then we're in a world of hurt.

Just to clarify, you brought up armed conflict. Sometimes just being prepared and ready is all it takes to move the needle. Our military is for defense, not armed aggression and oppression. Same theory as “Minutemen”. I am familiar with radical militias and their pitfalls.

The title of the thread is "Minutemen?" They were part of armed conflict. Alien just extended out the thought process of using this "armed conflict".

To answer your question, yes I'm a veteran. No, it's not time for Minutemen. I'm curious what you would have them do in your definition of "defending the Constitution" ?

[f6john]

Multiple armed factions of civilians defending their point of view in the streets equals anarchy and civil war.

Group A rises up to defend the constitution.

Group B rises up to defend the constitution but disagrees with group A on a few key points.

Groups A and B end up attacking each other.

Group C just wants to live peacefully but now feel thast they have to defend themselves against groupd A and B, so they arm themselves also.

Group D, seeing Group C arming themselves, gets scared and attacks first, out of fear.

Rinse and repeat for groups e-z.  

Then Insurrection is declared andpolice as well as the actual military is sent in to fight groups A-Z.

Total chaos and destruction.  Mass death.  There would be no winners, only survivors.

Let's not do that.  Put the gun down.  Pick up a ballot and vote your concience.  

Are you a veteran? Just asking as a point of reference. I take your points but as you know our voting is even coming under attack and voter participation is many times dismal. But under the circumstances we won’t be counting on you to stand for the Constitution or the family unit when “it” really hits the fan.

I am not a military veteran. I did, however serve a two year term with AmeriCorps.  While I don't in any way equate the two, the concept of service is not lost on me.  At any rate, I'm not taking a political position on this issue, I'm just saying that if one group starts shooting, everybody starts shooting and then we're in a world of hurt.

Just to clarify, you brought up armed conflict. Sometimes just being prepared and ready is all it takes to move the needle. Our military is for defense, not armed aggression and oppression. Same theory as “Minutemen”. I am familiar with radical militias and their pitfalls.

The title of the thread is "Minutemen?" They were part of armed conflict. Alien just extended out the thought process of using this "armed conflict".

To answer your question, yes I'm a veteran. No, it's not time for Minutemen. I'm curious what you would have them do in your definition of "defending the Constitution" ?

They were part of armed conflict, they had to be ready, they didn’t say, “We’re minutemen let’s go kill someone.” What I would have them do would depend on the circumstances. You figure out how bad it would have to get before armed conflict would have to be an option. I’m not surprised in your response, not that you’re right or wrong but totally consistent.

[Robert]

To Alien and Meat,

President Trump said,

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

https://youtu.be/Tt2yGzHfy7s

 


Jess that is awesome thanks.

[Oss]

I read the original post several times before considering a response

The question has been raised over centuries.  The threats originally were believed to be the
native americans before the Revolutionary War (French and Indian Wars) and then the British empire.

The problem, then as now is some were on one side and some on the other  All sincere colonists

The original Minutemen were simply folks in the Boston vicinity who would be willing to get their powder and musket or rifle out asap when asked to defend against the British

Some great books include One Second After.  What happens when government collapses.
The people who come to your community afterward may have what appears a different agenda.

Not a vetern myself, my # was 348 and the war was over so I went to college at 17.

If asked by our local police to stand, yes I would as I know like and trust them as I would if asked by POTUS

If asked by Cuomo, frankly no  do not trust the miscreant in any measure whatsoever

Being an armed citizen is a great responsibility. IMHO we all should be ready to do so.
  Protecting ones property is wholly different than going forth in another place to kill people

[The emperor has no clothes]

Multiple armed factions of civilians defending their point of view in the streets equals anarchy and civil war.

Group A rises up to defend the constitution.

Group B rises up to defend the constitution but disagrees with group A on a few key points.

Groups A and B end up attacking each other.

Group C just wants to live peacefully but now feel thast they have to defend themselves against groupd A and B, so they arm themselves also.

Group D, seeing Group C arming themselves, gets scared and attacks first, out of fear.

Rinse and repeat for groups e-z.  

Then Insurrection is declared andpolice as well as the actual military is sent in to fight groups A-Z.

Total chaos and destruction.  Mass death.  There would be no winners, only survivors.

Let's not do that.  Put the gun down.  Pick up a ballot and vote your concience.  

Are you a veteran? Just asking as a point of reference. I take your points but as you know our voting is even coming under attack and voter participation is many times dismal. But under the circumstances we won’t be counting on you to stand for the Constitution or the family unit when “it” really hits the fan.

I am not a military veteran. I did, however serve a two year term with AmeriCorps.  While I don't in any way equate the two, the concept of service is not lost on me.  At any rate, I'm not taking a political position on this issue, I'm just saying that if one group starts shooting, everybody starts shooting and then we're in a world of hurt.

Just to clarify, you brought up armed conflict. Sometimes just being prepared and ready is all it takes to move the needle. Our military is for defense, not armed aggression and oppression. Same theory as “Minutemen”. I am familiar with radical militias and their pitfalls.

The title of the thread is "Minutemen?" They were part of armed conflict. Alien just extended out the thought process of using this "armed conflict".

To answer your question, yes I'm a veteran. No, it's not time for Minutemen. I'm curious what you would have them do in your definition of "defending the Constitution" ?

They were part of armed conflict, they had to be ready, they didn’t say, “We’re minutemen let’s go kill someone.” What I would have them do would depend on the circumstances. You figure out how bad it would have to get before armed conflict would have to be an option. I’m not surprised in your response, not that you’re right or wrong but totally consistent.

That's almost exactly what they were saying. "We are men who are willing to go kill at a moments notice". The thing you don't seem to take into account, is they were in an armed revolution against the government. Is that what you are suggesting we need ?

[Jess from VA]

Back to organizing, how?  You going to advertise?  Invite people to your house?  Any success at all would likely bring instant FBI/Fed/State Police undercover joiners.  Which would not necessarily be bad, if you were trying to create a legitimate, lawful (as much as possible) organization, but no one wants that level of transparency to the G.  How will you weed out the crazy or undesirable element?  How will you vet?

I couldn't even figure out how to put together 5-6 good men from my own (big) neighborhood.  Three doors down, I have a retired Army intel officer with three sandbox tours, but he has a huge house full of kids and cousins and a job.  There might be a few more but I have no idea if there are.  What am I going to do, go door to door, use flyers in mailboxes.... and ID myself?  No freekin way.  You don't ever even talk to neighbors about this stuff at all, unless you really, really know them very well.  And you're still better off, never talking to any neighbors at all about any of this stuff.  

Now if you were part of a national or air guard unit, which is already vetted/trained/removed of crazies, and you knew the men well, you might put together a small unit, but from all over the state (or multiple states)?  How does that work?

The devil is in the details, and it's an extremely tricky proposition.  

 

[The emperor has no clothes]

To Alien and Meat,

President Trump said,

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

https://youtu.be/Tt2yGzHfy7s

 


Jess that is awesome thanks.

It's curious why some get amusement from deceit. In context your video is a little different.


Obama, July 2, Colorado Springs, CO: [As] president I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots [from 75,000] and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals, like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their effort connected to a common purpose.

People of all ages, stations and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem – they are the answer. So we are going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We’ll call on Americans to join an energy corps, to conduct renewable energy and environmental clean-up projects in their neighborhoods all across the country.

We will enlist our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, and to be there for our military families. And we’re going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy. We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set.

We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded. We need to use technology to connect people to service. We’ll expand USA Freedom Corps to create online networks where American can browse opportunities to volunteer. You’ll be able to search by category, time commitment and skill sets. You’ll be able to rate service opportunities, build service networks, and create your own service pages to track your hours and activities.

This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda and make their own change from the bottom up.

[Robert]

In context your video is a little different.

I'm sure, 

[f6john]

Multiple armed factions of civilians defending their point of view in the streets equals anarchy and civil war.

Group A rises up to defend the constitution.

Group B rises up to defend the constitution but disagrees with group A on a few key points.

Groups A and B end up attacking each other.

Group C just wants to live peacefully but now feel thast they have to defend themselves against groupd A and B, so they arm themselves also.

Group D, seeing Group C arming themselves, gets scared and attacks first, out of fear.

Rinse and repeat for groups e-z.  

Then Insurrection is declared andpolice as well as the actual military is sent in to fight groups A-Z.

Total chaos and destruction.  Mass death.  There would be no winners, only survivors.

Let's not do that.  Put the gun down.  Pick up a ballot and vote your concience.  

Are you a veteran? Just asking as a point of reference. I take your points but as you know our voting is even coming under attack and voter participation is many times dismal. But under the circumstances we won’t be counting on you to stand for the Constitution or the family unit when “it” really hits the fan.

I am not a military veteran. I did, however serve a two year term with AmeriCorps.  While I don't in any way equate the two, the concept of service is not lost on me.  At any rate, I'm not taking a political position on this issue, I'm just saying that if one group starts shooting, everybody starts shooting and then we're in a world of hurt.

Just to clarify, you brought up armed conflict. Sometimes just being prepared and ready is all it takes to move the needle. Our military is for defense, not armed aggression and oppression. Same theory as “Minutemen”. I am familiar with radical militias and their pitfalls.

The title of the thread is "Minutemen?" They were part of armed conflict. Alien just extended out the thought process of using this "armed conflict".

To answer your question, yes I'm a veteran. No, it's not time for Minutemen. I'm curious what you would have them do in your definition of "defending the Constitution" ?

They were part of armed conflict, they had to be ready, they didn’t say, “We’re minutemen let’s go kill someone.” What I would have them do would depend on the circumstances. You figure out how bad it would have to get before armed conflict would have to be an option. I’m not surprised in your response, not that you’re right or wrong but totally consistent.

That's almost exactly what they were saying. "We are men who are willing to go kill at a moments notice". The thing you don't seem to take into account, is they were in an armed revolution against the government. Is that what you are suggesting we need ?

You are notorious for interpreting  what someone else is saying to suit yourself for your own reasons. I think I have been crystal clear in posing the question. You have been crystal clear in where you want the discussion to go.

[f6john]

I read the original post several times before considering a response

The question has been raised over centuries.  The threats originally were believed to be the
native americans before the Revolutionary War (French and Indian Wars) and then the British empire.

The problem, then as now is some were on one side and some on the other  All sincere colonists

The original Minutemen were simply folks in the Boston vicinity who would be willing to get their powder and musket or rifle out asap when asked to defend against the British

Some great books include One Second After.  What happens when government collapses.
The people who come to your community afterward may have what appears a different agenda.

Not a vetern myself, my # was 348 and the war was over so I went to college at 17.

If asked by our local police to stand, yes I would as I know like and trust them as I would if asked by POTUS

If asked by Cuomo, frankly no  do not trust the miscreant in any measure whatsoever

Being an armed citizen is a great responsibility. IMHO we all should be ready to do so.
  Protecting ones property is wholly different than going forth in another place to kill people

As my Dad used to say, “the devil is in the details”. Part of the reason I posed the question. The picture Jess posted is partly what I’m thinking. I’m not smart enough to know how to network all these groups and keep out the crazies who just want to stir up trouble. I haven’t watched the YouTube link yet so no comment on that at this point.

[Robert]

I’m not smart enough to know how to network all these groups and keep out the crazies who just want to stir up trouble. I haven’t watched the YouTube link yet so no comment on that at this point.

You wont entirely be able to keep the crazies out, but they will all reveal themselves over time. Its really not that hard to put an organization together like this. Also know that if you get big enough or noted enough the government will infiltrate the group.

If the black group of anarchists put a para military group together and wound up shooting someone in the group and they are still around, I doubt anyone else will have a hard time.

[DirtyDan]

Minute man, .......?

Sounds like MY award FROM the military ( never served however the military gave it to me )

Dan

[98valk]

To Alien and Meat,

President Trump said,

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

https://youtu.be/Tt2yGzHfy7s

 


Jess that is awesome thanks.

It's curious why some get amusement from deceit. In context your video is a little different.


Obama, July 2, Colorado Springs, CO: [As] president I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots [from 75,000] and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals, like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their effort connected to a common purpose.

People of all ages, stations and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem – they are the answer. So we are going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We’ll call on Americans to join an energy corps, to conduct renewable energy and environmental clean-up projects in their neighborhoods all across the country.

We will enlist our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, and to be there for our military families. And we’re going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy. We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set.

We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded. We need to use technology to connect people to service. We’ll expand USA Freedom Corps to create online networks where American can browse opportunities to volunteer. You’ll be able to search by category, time commitment and skill sets. You’ll be able to rate service opportunities, build service networks, and create your own service pages to track your hours and activities.

This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda and make their own change from the bottom up.

this is what obama and lately other democrats with their defund the police only to be replaced with a national police force which will be made up off many foreigners aka mercenaries who care nothing about American citizens and its values.

The history behind efforts to nationalize police forces should also spark alarm over Obama’s plan. It is worth recalling that Communist efforts to nationalize local police forces across the United States date back to at least the 1960s. Toward that end, communist agitators, along with their front groups and useful idiots, have long created problems or exploited existing ones to drum up hatred and violence against police. In recent anti-police marches, communist-made signs and slogans were visible everywhere. But it is hardly a new development.

In an official 1961 report entitled “A Communist Plot Against the Free World Police,” the Judiciary Committee of the U.S. Congress explained how communist agents across the West were working to nationalize and federalize police forces — with a special focus on the United States. The explosive study documents, among other elements of the strategy, the forming of mobs to attack police. Obama’s own radical background and associations with communist terrorists — including launching his political career in the home of Castro-backed terrorist leader Bill Ayers — should provide further cause for concern. His racialist anti-police comments, blurted out every time a suitable incident emerges to be exploited, should also offer warnings of the true agenda.

In the end, the Constitution does not authorize Obama’s “national standards” for police, or the taxpayer-funded bribes being used to spread them nationwide. That means the scheme is unconstitutional on its face. Even if it were constitutional, though, history shows that it would be a terrible and dangerous idea. Police departments should be responsible to the communities that fund them and that they are supposed to serve — not Obama, Holder, or the UN and its “international standards.” To allow further federalization of America’s police agencies is a sure recipe for disaster.

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/20305-obama-unveils-plan-to-further-nationalize-local-police