Attention all Military Personnel!!! Could you fire your weapon upon an American Citizen on our own soil?

American Civil War.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
sounds like you conversed with a real winner.

sadly, this is how much of our country (both civilian and military) does business. They don’t think, they don’t care, they just follow orders.

In a time of war or of national crisis, this just becomes more and more apparent as the few people alive enough to notice stand up and ask the tough questions. Too often the people asking tough questions get labeled as conspiracy nuts and fanatics, and thus discredited. cough Alex Jones/infowars cough

9/11, the Patriot Act, The two active wars the United States is currently involved in, it just doesn’t stop. The sad truth is the people with the money, influence, and agendas call the shots, and dissidents will not be tolerated.

So as you can see, the true patriots (those who love and defend the Constitution and what this country actually used to stand for) are often abused and silenced by the “patriots” who are merely following orders

Surely you don’t believe there are no American Citizens who are enemies of the people? What about Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nicols. Many people would have been saved if only they had been stopped before they blew up the Oklahoma Federal building.

Every day we read of American Citizens who are arrested for plotting against their own people.

Are you surprised to run into someone so unaware of his rights and responsibilities? My guess is close to half the citizens of our country are as ill-informed as he iis. Who do you think is bringing their ignorance to the table as we try to dialogue about Americas problems? All we can hope for is good leadership but unfortunately history tells us bad things will happen because we can’t be bothered to think.

@YARNLADY

I have no issues with law enforcement conducting warranted investigations on citizens that pose a threat to the personal safety of other American citizens. But I don’t see how troops would have helped deter McVeigh or Nicols. Better intelligence is the only thing that would have stopped that.

But my big problem with Gunnery Sergeant Bob is what he said about the Constitution.

”My job is to protect the Constitution from the American People.”

How can he do that when it belongs to the American People?

Seems to me (and this is not meant to categorize every single person that has ever joined the military, even in modern day, but just meant to be an observation about what I’ve seen in my own experience), that people become soldiers for two main reasons.

1) They believe strongly in service to country, and they feel as this gentleman did that being a foot soldier means they would follow orders without question as it is not the duty of the soldier, that duty is to do whatever the people who are paid to think for their country say to do, period, even if that means killing your own mother.

2) They simply aren’t bright enough to carve out another career path on their own that will be seemingly as lucrative to them as a military career.

Some times it’s one, some times it’s the other (the more intelligent folks who go into the service often do so AFTER obtaining a college degree, or enlist with the purpose of obtaining said degree during or after their tours of duty, but often these folks fall into category one and still believe that the chain of command is the most important thing, and would still find it to be their duty, even if they were in charge of giving orders as officers, to take and fulfill the orders of people with higher rank…that is the entire BASIS for the military).

In your case, you clearly have encountered the not too uncommon subset of soldiers who fall into both categories 1 and 2. And it should come as no surprise that one would give the answer about firing on American citizens on American soil if told to do so, if we could not hypothetically count on our military personnel to do whatever they were told without questioning it, the entire military structure would collapse…anyone who is going to have any longevity in the military would probably also answer than in the affirmative.

But it sounds as though this individual is likely of the #2 variety first and foremost. Often people are drawn into patriotism not knowing what it really means. Consider for example the country band the Dixie Chicks. The very FIRST amendment to our Bill of Rights guarantees all Americans the right to free expression, yet when one of these women DARED to state they were ashamed of the actions of their President, they were blacklisted, they got death threats, and it was all at the hands of people who considered themselves “patriots”, as in “it’s unpatriotic to question the President,” when indeed speaking your mind is perhaps the most patriotic thing a person can do.

The ignorant unwashed masses are drawn to yellow ribbons on their cars and flag stickers in their windows because they think this is what Patriotism means. It is this same ignorant group which is often of the opinion that what a true American does is serves his country, without question.

Color me unsurprised.

Cops shoot American Citizens every day. Criminals. Malcontents. And they get ridiculed for it too. I would definitely shoot an American citizen if he/she warranted such deadly force.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies you might want to study this site for more eye-opening military idealogies.

I am not military, nor am I a cop, but if my life or my family is threatened by another American citizen who is in my house illegally, you bet your ass I’ll shoot the bastard! When it comes to self-protection, any means necessary is my motto.

The military have the right to use deadly force if the situation calls for it.

Actually, there is a fascinating book by Lt. Col. David Grossman called On Killing which reports, among other things, archaeological evidence from several battlefields which shows that upwards of 80% of soldiers never fire their weapons, even at a foreign enemy, and even under attack. And, when they do fire, they shoot to miss.

In the Civil War this was even more the case. They found lots and lots of muskets with up to 24 rounds stuffed down their barrels, showing that the soldiers (on both sides) were just going through the motions of the battle while avoiding actual killing. Moreover, there appears to have been a tacit understanding among soldiers that this was okay. Only about 2% of soldiers readily shoot to kill and seem to have little trouble doing so, but they, according to Grossman, seem to be psychopaths who exist in the general population in the same proportion.

Vietnam was the first war in which soldiers were compelled to fire, thus increasing the kill rate. The psychological effects were devastating. They were masked for a time with anti-depressants and the soldier’s own self-medication, but as soon as these meds wore off, “battle fatigue” or PTSD set in. The use of amphetamines also seems to overcome this natural resistance, and this may be the wave of the future in “killology.”

The reluctance to kill can also be overcome by demonizing the enemy. This is easy to do if the “other” is someone of another race, ethnicity or social class. Over the past 20 years there has been a striking militarization of the police, under which the police have come to view themselves as an occupying army, and the public as an increasingly hostile population that is in league with “criminals.” The result is a drift toward highly confrontational, high-adrenaline, SWAT-style tactics even in routine policing situations.

These, of course, unnecessarily place civilians in the position of getting shot by over-excited cops thinking that they are under attack when the people they burst in on make a sudden move. The courts have granted the police virtual impunity to the police in these shootings because it is almost impossible to prove that the shooter did not have a reasonable fear that his life was in danger in these tumultuous encounters.

If you were banking on soldiers or police refusing to fire on civilians, just look at the footage of any G7 or G20 protest and weep. They are not only willing, but eager to inflict any level of harm. Indeed, the more lopsided the power differential, and bigger and more oppressive the weapons they have, the more enthusiastic they seem to become. Most riots nowadays are actually police riots meaning that they were instigated or caused by the police.

@dalepetrie I think that view is unnecessarily patronizing, undignified and harsh. One of the unstated aims of The No Child Left Behind Policy was to create a social sorting mechanism whereby lower class folks were funneled toward menial, dead-end jobs so that they would find the military an attractive way out. Unfortunately, it ended up creating a
school-to-prison pipeline as well, since prison serves as a stick to the military carrot.

The military doesn’t want soldiers that think. Period. That goes for any military in the world.

@Zuma can you post ten more times I can give you the lurve that you deserve?

Where’s Bluefreedom when you need him?

I’m currently in the Air Force and I have never really encountered anyone on @dalepetrie‘s list. Most of the people I know joined for the education benefits or for a steady paycheck. A lot of people were in dead end jobs before the military and see the military as a way to improve themselves, which it definitely can be. No one I’ve met is a super gung-ho patriot that is just aching to shoot someone or die for their country.

Sure there are stupid people in the military, but there are plenty of stupid people in every aspect of life. There are also intelligent people in the military, just like in every other part of life. I know a lot of people that had successful careers before the military and joined anyway. There are also of course people that joined immediately after high school and all they know is military life. And of course loads of people take their military experience and get out to have successful careers after the military.

Your stereotypes may be more noticeable in other branches of the military, I’m not sure. I only have experience with the AF.

As for the actual question, everyone in the military is trained to follow orders. That’s just how it works. If I’m in combat or about to drop a bomb on someone I can’t turn around and argue with my commanding officer about the merits of doing such and such action, I just need to do it. This does get frustrating at times, there have been a lot of moments in my career so far where I think a commander’s decision is just the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. I complain about it to my co-workers, but I still have to put up with it regardless. This is what pushes a lot of the smarter people out of the military in my opinion. I had a lot of experience before joining the military in running my own business, as well as a lot of technical experience. It’s difficult seeing ridiculous inefficiency and just plain horrible ideas frequently. I want to input my own ideas and say how things could be better, but because of my rank no one is interested in what I have to say. To someone that just wants to clock in and out and do what their told they may not even notice those things, let alone want to put forth the effort to improve them. So, the types that like to improve things instead get out and go work for a defense contractor or other private company where they can make more of a difference.

@StellarAirman – in the same sentence you say you’ve never encountered anyone who falls into either of my categories, and then go on to describe the reason some people have gone in because it gives them a better path to success than they could otherwise achieve, which WAS one of my points. I acknowledged that there are intelligent people and said they are the ones who either go in post college or go in for the education benefits, same as you. And I never said the stupid ones were ‘gung ho’ to kill anyone, I said they mistake military service for patriotism, and I also said just like you said, they are trained to follow orders.

I can however tell you that in my high school and college, the people who joined the military were NOT the A and B students, they were the C and D students. In my adult life, the people I’ve met in the service who were intelligent, engaging interesting people were officers or on an officer path. Bottom line is, patronizing or not, a LOT of average to below average people gravitate to the military, just as they gravitate towards being grocery store clerks, gas station attendants, janitors and what not, because it is work they CAN do, they’re interested in DOING, not in THINKING. Some of these people have FAR more common sense than your typical egghead, and they’re not “bad” people. I can see how one would see this as an elitist attitude, but I must make it clear, I’m not saying that EVERYONE who enlists is stupid or even less than smart. I’m saying that work that requires nothing but following orders is going to appeal MORE to people who have no desire or ability to do anything MORE than that, and anyone who wants MORE out of life will be LESS likely to find that to be an interesting path. Unless as I said it’s a stepping stone to greater things. But again, for people who are of above average intelligence, the path to greater things isn’t that hard to find WITHOUT taking a chance you’ll be killed on a foreign battlefield,

So, please don’t take this to mean that I think everyone in the military is stupid. I’m just pointing out obvious facts that one can confirm easily by simply observing the world around them.

I’ve been in the military for over 20 years now so I’ll take a shot at trying to put forth a good answer to this question.

First of all, our own troops probably will never be deployed on our own soil for peacekeeping or law enforcement purposes unless it is a martial law situation and there are only two types – Qualified and Absolute. Additionally, the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C. § 1385) prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services (today the Army, Air Force, and State National Guard forces when such are called into federal service) from exercising nominally state law enforcement, police, or peace officer powers that maintain “law and order” on non-federal property (states and their counties and municipal divisions) within the United States.

I can’t imagine any reasonable or plausible scenarios that would entail U.S. forces firing weapons against American citizens and should a situation like this arise, I believe you would find thousands upon thousands of military members rebelling against the order to do so. ALL MEMBERS of the military have the right to refuse orders that are immoral or unethical and this situation would qualify in that regard.

As far as some of the comments from Gunnery Sergeant Bob in the questions details, I was going to forego analyzing them but some I just can’t resist commenting on.

Alright then Bob, I’m interested in getting your opinion about something. How do you feel about American Troops being deployed on American soil?

”I’m all for it.” – Ignorance is bliss to this guy apparently. Either he isn’t aware of Martial Law and Posse Comitatus or he forgot about learning that somewhere in his military career.
_____________________________________________

Well really? For what reason?

”To keep domestic peace.” – HINT: Civilian law enforcement agencies are in place for a reason along with other supporting agencies to assist in this regard. An ignorant response once again.
_____________________________________________

Would you fire your weapon upon an American Citizen?

”Absolutely!” – This is a very poorly thought out response and one that shows this individual isn’t prepared to analyze the moral and ethical implications of the act he is going to carry out.
_____________________________________________

Would you follow orders beyond what your conscious allowed?

”I’m not paid to have a conscious. I’m paid to follow orders.” – What a terrible response in my opinion. If you don’t have a conscious, you don’t need to be taking up arms because you’re not displaying the proper maturity and common sense to be serving responsibly in our armed forces.

@Bluefreedom

Your words are very comforting. Please continue to be the fine example you are to others, both military and civilian.

Well spoken Bluefreedom.

@Bluefreedom Applause

@Bluefreedom finally, the voice of reason makes itself heard.

@Bluefreedom – add one more GA to your collection, Bravo.

@Bluefreedom “Either he isn’t aware of Martial Law and Posse Comitatus or he forgot about learning that somewhere in his military career.”

Sorry, but according to Wikipedia, the Posse Comitatus act was repealed in 2008. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_comitatus_(common_law) <—needs to have peren to come up.

In 2006, Congress greatly expanded the powers of the Insurrection Act in order to make it much easier for presidents to declare martial law. Fortunately, the law was changed back in 2008. Nonetheless, it does illustrate how quickly the law can be changed without anybody in the general public or the military (apparently) knowing anything about it. So, a scenario involving US troops being called out on their fellow citizens may not be as far-fetched as it may seem.

One of the more worrisome aspects of the militarization of the police (and the use of the military for police purposes) is the use of private contractors, like Blackwater. We are creating a thug class that is for hire to the highest bidder and, since they have no loyalty to civillian authority, they may someday decide to go into business for itself. You may recall that private armies in Rome ushered in a 90-year period of civil war, after which everyone was so war-weary that they threw away their Republic and embraced the Ceasers and Imperial rule.

They have already been joint military and police training exercises in Oakland, California; which, apart from training in coordinating tactics, men and hardware, appear to be designed to desensitize the military to pacifying, processing and packing US citizens off to detention camps.

Also, what happens if the recession grows deeper and more police departments run out of money? There is already a precedent for calling in the national guard.

I’m not quite ready to accept that “there’s nothing to see here; move along.”

@Bluefreedom I’m wondering how that relates to what happen at Kent State when the National Guard fired on unarmed demonstrators, and killed some passers-by who weren’t even aware of the protest.

@Zuma. The article in Wikipedia about the Posse Comitatus Act, shown here, states that changes to the act were repealed in their entirety in 2008 reverting to the previous wording of the Insurrection Act and in essence, the Posse Comitatus Act is still in effect. Here is a paragraph from the Wikipedia article that sums it up very succinctly and I meant to include it in my original answer:

The statute generally prohibits federal military personnel and units of the National Guard under federal authority 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 during peacetime.

It certainly isn’t a perfect or foolproof plan and there is a potential for exploitation by the government like you hinted at in your most recent answer. I still stand firm behind my original answer that the Posse Comitatus Act is still a viable law that prevents American troops from keeping the peace and conducting civilian law enforcement along with martial law being the catalyst that can change that. I talked to one of the members of my military squadron, who recently returned from Technical School in Lackland, Air Force Base where they go for training in our career field, and he told me that they still teach the recruits that the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits military members from enforcing civilian law and order.

It’s been brought up before about the use of private security contractors and it’s affiliation with the military. As of right now, the private security companies (mercenaries, some believe) do not fall under the military chain of command and aren’t directed or supervised by the United States military. At least not here in America but I’m not 100% sure of what is truly going on behind all the scenes in Iraq and Afghanistan. No one else does either, though, for that matter.

After this question was asked yesterday, I walked all through my squadron and asked my friends and co-workers the exact same question that was posed on Fluther – Could you fire your weapon upon an American Citizen on our own soil? I’m happy to state that there was a resounding agreement amongst us all that we would be very disinclined to indiscriminately fire weapons upon American citizens and I’ll reiterate what I said before, I firmly believe that a vast amount of military personnel would go against the idea of firing their weapons on American citizens.

@YARNLADY. I think what happened at Kent State was a very sad tragedy and a disgraceful incident. In my opinion, I think it demonstrated poor judgement and lack of proper leadership and control by the Ohio National Guard. I’m not completely inclined to believe that the National Guard should have been there in the first place either but I’m probably not a good authority to Monday morning quarterback an incident that occurred 29 years ago. It’s just speculation on my part.

@Bluefreedom Yep. You’re right (whew). In the other site it looked as though it was the only changes to the Martial Law law that reverted back, but repealing the changes made in 2006 changes them both back, which is what the other sites I’ve checked seem to say.

I must say that your use of the word “indiscriminately” seems to undercut any reassurance that they would be disinclined to fire on Americans. Do you ever get an order to fire on people indiscriminately? I would feel much better if they had said that they would refuse to fire on Americans.

@Zuma. The use of the word ‘indiscriminately’ was something that I, alone, used to help formulate my answer and was not the word my friends and co-workers said. It was not a good choice, obviously, and my apologies for not elaborating better. I cannot remember all of their responses verbatim but like I said, it was clear to me after our conversations that all of us were steadfast about not wanting to fire weapons at U.S. citizens. I hope that makes it a little clearer.

Thank you so much for the clarification!

It is the duty of an Officer to decline to follow an unlawful order. Any violation of Posse Comitatus falls into that category. The only exception would be self defense or during properly authorized Martial Law situations. Generally, US Armed Forces are always subordinated to local or state Law Enforcement and are only authorized to subdue and hold civilians for them. Now that I am retired, I would not hesitate to cap someone in self defense, or to protect someone in mortal peril. Those would be the only reasons to fire a weapon at anyone I can imagine.

It depends on the situation and who I would have to shoot. If someone were to enter my house with the intent to harm me or my family you are damn right I would put one in the head and two in the chest. If there was someone who is american and he is classified as a terrorist or anything along those lines then yes I would absolutely put one between his eyes. My job as a Marine is to defend what is written in the United States Constitution and to defend America’s people. If it were random Joe Schmo on the streets I had to shoot then most likely not unless I felt my life was endangered.

@majorrich

This is true, but as I recall, it’s not just officers who are under this general order. Any member of the US Armed Forces who is given an order that appears on its face to be unlawful is duty-bound to refuse to follow said order.

To respond directly to the OP’s question: no, I would never fire on another American citizen, whether ordered to do so or not, unless it was a matter of self-defense, defense of family, or defense of those obviously in peril.

ADDENDUM: But I would probably shoot the officer who gave me such an order! : )

@CaptainHarley Agreed

: D

To answer your question: NO

Being a brother in arms (fellow Gunnery sergeant) to Gunnery Sergeant Bob I would have to say that I could see those answers coming.

We are being taught via disciplinary examples what to say and not say in any type of ‘interview’ no matter how informal.

Would I reply with the same answers? Nope, but then I am one that has, while honorably serving my country, used the Marine Corps as a step towards accomplishing my dreams.

Staff Non-Commissioned Officers SNCOs (E-6 thru E-9) are being punitively dealt with regularly for posting the wrong thing on their facebook, or supporting the wrong agenda in a public way (anti-Obama sentiment recently).

So…what is always the right answer? ”I follow the orders of those over me.”

I am somewhat surprised, that even with alcohol involved you didn’t get a “no comment”, but if you paid for the alcohol then that suddenly makes sense!

I consider the oath that I took upon enlistment and every reinlistement very seriously ”...to support and defend the constitution of the United States of America…” I believe Americans have the “right to bear arms” for a reason.

Lately, it seems like what we generally consider the government don’t consider the constitution when deciding what their powers are. I see a possible future conflict there, especially in the situation you are inquiring about. I have no doubt about which side I will choose to be on, though I refuse to comment here ;)

Not knowing more of the context surrounding this ‘informal’ interview, I refuse to speculate further, but rather respond based on what @RealEyesRealizeRealLies chooses to reveal with us:

If a person tried to ‘interview’ me in this manner, I would pay for my own drinks, hire a taxi, or call my wife and take my impaired self home, and remain insulted for a time.

When I get in a better mood and my decision making returns to normal, solemnly right hook him the next time the interviewer approaches me. Don’t worry, I would post pictures on fluther.

Shoot you…nah…punch the person that threaten the income I provide my family…yeah.

But it wasn’t me, and I can predict now that it probably won’t ever be based on the context of the story, so everyone is safe.