The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 22, 2009, 05:49 AM   #1
armoredman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,785
A thought on the common topic of general militia usage

Many here are passingly familiar with the Militia Act of 1792, and even more familiar with how the 2A protects the right to keep and bear arms in order to have a well drilled, "regulated", militia, notwithstanding the recent excellent Supreme Court ruling that finally recognizes the right to self defense NOT being connected to militia service. Some good people have formed militias, or joined one, and some states have state guards that do somewhat the same job. Title 10 US Code still states that, IIRC, that the unorganized militia is all able bodied men between 18 and 45 not in uniform or in the Naval Miltia. (I wanna battleship for my Naval Militia! )
Please correct me if I am wrong, I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV.
Given that, many here have posted thier "militia" setups, myself included, rifle, ammo, gear, sidearm, etc, that we have been fortunate enough to be able to afford to put together, whether or not we would ever actually expect to use it. The liklihood is vanishingly small that the government, state or federal, would ever issue a general call up of the unorganized militia, and we simply have fun with our firearms, like I do at the range, or hunting or simply collecting. It's a fun hobby, and I like shooting my vz-58 and reloading for it quite a bit.
BUT, imagine the actual case of when a militia call up might happen in your area. Who would do it? Chances are that the infrastructure of the area/state would be smashed heavily, to prohibit movement of organized troops into the area from unaffected zones, or that a general rout of what organized troops that had been employed has taken place. Hollywood aside, and of course discarding the always popular, "what caliber for zombies", we move into, what happens if you DO get "the call", I am assuming by radio or word of mouth spread by survivors. This scenario leaves out the Katrina situations, as organized forces were able to move in relatively quickly from other locations to assist, instead of being heavily involved in other locations.
Why would I ask this? Well, as a minor and casual student of history, armies in rout tend to leave quite a bit of equipment behind, Bull Run and other famous disasters come to mind. I am an out of shape 40+ year old man with no formal training as an infantryman, (Navy training from 20+ years ago doesn't count for squat in this case, unless they need a deck chipped and painted. ), so if I actually show up to a place where troops are trying to rally whatever survivors, stragglers and walking wounded they have, given some lessons from history, what chance do you think there would be that the ranking military person, (Active or retired, to be fair), in the marshalling area would be attempting to take the good setups from those who lack the wherewithal to effectively use it on the battlefield, and re issue them to trained soldiers who may have lost thier weapons in the retreat/rout/destruction of the local armory? I would be loath to give up my favorite rifle, certainly, but I could concievably see the commander "requisitioning" it for someone who could actually use it in combat better than I could, and possibly leave me with my faithful beat up old Enfield No4Mk1* to guard an ad hoc ammo dump, hospital or supply center. I could see it even more likely in the case of those who use the AR rifles, as that would be more familiar to what former or active duty troops that may be where ever this attempted reorganization is taking place.
Leave out the many state laws that were passed after Katrinas aftermath, including my own state of Arizona, stating that firearms will not be taken in emergency situations, as I doubt many military commanders thrown in this situation would be too concerned with niceties, and far more concerned with fielding some sort of armed body of troops to face (X).
Lots of suppositions in a row, I know.
Thoughts, criticisms, comments?
__________________
http://czfirearms.us/ same original CZForum, new location.

Last edited by armoredman; December 22, 2009 at 05:59 AM.
armoredman is offline  
Old December 22, 2009, 07:31 AM   #2
BlueTrain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 26, 2005
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 5,825
So you are imagining the possibility that the army or national guard would be less well equipped than a civilian?

Actually, I have a difficult time imagining a senario in which the United States is invaded out of the blue, totally unexpected. And really, I can't think of any other time that's happened. Pearl Harbor was neither an invasion or entirely unexpected. They just didn't get the word in tiime. This isn't to say that invasions are never a surprise. Generally they are planned in great secrecy but things rarely happen without a buildup of both tension and military forces. But you never know how things will turn out.

It is rare in history when unorganized resistance to anything is successful. Most instances in which guerrila warfare or semi-guerrila warfare is waged, it is done so with considerable outside assistance, generally in the form of weapons and ammunition. And many wars that people imagine are fought by "the people" are in reality being fought by organized units equipped by the government, even if it is a rebel government. That pretty well describes the Boer side in the Boer Wars. They had government issued rifles and were in organized units, even if they did not wear uniforms.

By the time old folks my age are called up, it would be a pretty desparate situation, just like was done in Germany in 1945. Me and my .30-30 would probably just as well stay home and keep out of the way.
__________________
Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands!
Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag,
and return us to our own beloved homes!
Buy War Bonds.
BlueTrain is offline  
Old December 22, 2009, 07:34 AM   #3
Bud Helms
Staff
 
Join Date: December 31, 1999
Location: Middle Georgia
Posts: 13,003
Law & Civil Rights.

Moving.
__________________
"The irony of the Information Age is that it has given new respectability to uninformed opinion." - John Lawton, speaking to the American Association of Broadcast Journalists in 1995
Bud Helms is offline  
Old December 22, 2009, 09:29 PM   #4
armoredman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,785
BlueTrain, in the incredibly extreme chance of a call up of general militia, yes, it is a distinct possability that what shattered forces available may not have much resupply available. Any unit properly staffed and supplied would probably have no need or use for general militia. Refer to scenes of rout in history, and what armies tended to leave behind - everything including the kitchen sink. This is where my theoretical scene comes in, a military commander of whatever rank/unit/experiance attempting to create/resupply any unit he/she can create/reconstitute in an attempt to face (X) with an equipped force. The situation goes farther downhill if the commander is perhaps police with no military experiance.
Is this scenario likely? hardly, extremely UNlikely any militia call out would ever go out in any way, except for those very rare cases established militias/state guards have mobilized for natural disaster.
Just a thought that doesn't seem to interest anyone here.
__________________
http://czfirearms.us/ same original CZForum, new location.

Last edited by armoredman; December 22, 2009 at 09:37 PM.
armoredman is offline  
Old December 23, 2009, 08:43 PM   #5
armoredman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,785
guess nobody wanted to look at this possability, no matter.
__________________
http://czfirearms.us/ same original CZForum, new location.
armoredman is offline  
Old December 24, 2009, 02:22 PM   #6
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,686
Militia posts have been done to death - that's the reason. Search on it for some long and passionate discussions.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old December 24, 2009, 02:26 PM   #7
armoredman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,785
I thought this was a rather differant look at a tired old subject, but if that is the truth, please feel free to delete, wouldn't want to waste the space.
__________________
http://czfirearms.us/ same original CZForum, new location.
armoredman is offline  
Old December 24, 2009, 03:08 PM   #8
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,686
It's ok - see if others want to play - but I think they see militia and pass on it.

Just my thought.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old December 24, 2009, 03:43 PM   #9
nemo2econ
Member
 
Join Date: March 24, 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 85
Halbrook Second Amendment podcast

Glenn may be right, and militia posts don't draw a lot of interest here, I don't know. I only get on here every once in a while and so, to me, I've not really ever read/followed any posts on that subject.

However, I just posted a link to a really excellent podcast by Second Amendment scholar and attorney Stephen P. Halbrook. I was surprised to see him address, in a short portion late in the podcast, a rather more constitutionally broad view of the militia and the inability, under traditional mainstream jurisprudence, to even conceive in modern times of a militia in which able-bodied folk have a duty to serve.

This angle is a bit different than the main question in this thread. However, if anyone is interested, I highly recommend the Halbrook podcast. The link and summary in an adjacent post by the title: "Halbrook Second Amendment podcast".

Enjoy.
nemo2econ is offline  
Old December 24, 2009, 04:46 PM   #10
azredhawk44
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 28, 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 6,465
armoredman:

Given your original thread's concept of forced disarmament of civilians in order to resupply a routed fighting force...

Word of that type of thing spreads fast. I think you'd get a pretty uniform response of:
1. Lay folk turning back around with their "primary" rifle and support system for it, and returning back home.
2. Loading up on a "secondary" rifle and support system for it to donate.

I have no problem donating my backup AR-15 to a fighting force, on my side, in need of it. Heck, I'd throw in several other rifles, too...

But the rifle I personally know best and would have at my bedside in tough times is my M14... and no one is taking that away from me.
azredhawk44 is offline  
Old December 24, 2009, 06:10 PM   #11
Tennessee Gentleman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,611
I am generally one of the few who comment on militia threads. Must be a 12 step process to cure it somewhere.

Let me start by saying that the militia that existed in 1789 and that which the Second Amendment speaks about is deader than four o'clock yesterday. Has been for over a hundred years. That is the reason the antigunners created the idea that the RTKBA was tied only to militia service. Since the militia was dead then so too the RTKBA. They were wrong and Heller fixed that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by armoredman
Title 10 US Code still states that, IIRC, that the unorganized militia is all able bodied men between 18 and 45 not in uniform
And the unorganized militia has no rights, duties, or responsibilities and is merely a pool that the organized militia (the NG) may draw its members from.

Quote:
Originally Posted by armoredman
BUT, imagine the actual case of when a militia call up might happen in your area. Who would do it?
By law ONLY the state government may do it. Anything else is not a militia and that is true also of certain self-appointed "militia" groups that exist today. They are unauthorized paramilitary organizations. Folk banding together during disasters for mutual self-protection spontaneously are not militia either.

BTW, as long as the United States of America possesses strategic nuclear weapons their will be no foreign invasions by other countries and so no need for a "militia".

So, to recap, the only way a militia may be called out is by the state government (how that happens is subject to the particular state law) and the militia will answer to state authorities only (not themselves) and will receive their orders from such as well.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted."
Anonymous Soldier.

Last edited by Tennessee Gentleman; December 24, 2009 at 07:22 PM.
Tennessee Gentleman is offline  
Old December 25, 2009, 05:53 PM   #12
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,810
Quote:
And the unorganized militia has no rights, duties, or responsibilities and is merely a pool that the organized militia (the NG) may draw its members from.
Many states also have a state defense militia of volunteers that is not related tot he NG. Ohio's may be called by the governor. I believe this is the organization that would really pull from the pool legally.

All of these things have faded simply because bringing an occupying land force onto US soil is nearly impossible. Taiwan has the ability to hold the entire Chinese land based military at bay with stealth boats we sold them. Shoulder fired anti-air rockets have become(relatively) cheap. Not saying the US does not have weak spots, but getting a land force to our coast/border and to maintain its supply lines is just very unlikely so no one puts much thought into what to do if it happens.
__________________
$0 of an NRA membership goes to legislative action or court battles. Not a dime. Only money contributed to the NRA-ILA or NRA-PVF. You could just donate to the Second Amendment Foundation
First Shotgun Thread First Rifle Thread First Pistol Thread
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old December 25, 2009, 06:48 PM   #13
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,686
Quote:
Taiwan has the ability to hold the entire Chinese land based military at bay with stealth boats we sold them.
Not to thread hijack - but could you reference this? I don't think this is correct.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old December 25, 2009, 09:09 PM   #14
Tennessee Gentleman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,611
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwilliamson062
Many states also have a state defense militia of volunteers that is not related tot he NG. Ohio's may be called by the governor.
My comment was in regard to the referenced Fed statute. The militia is very much related to the NG in that it is controlled by the State Government unless federalized.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted."
Anonymous Soldier.
Tennessee Gentleman is offline  
Old December 26, 2009, 02:16 AM   #15
GHF
Member
 
Join Date: June 4, 2007
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 84
There were 3 objectives to this amendment:
  1. Needed an immediate army to defend the country - real big, no people, and foreign (British) enemies.
  2. Feared military power concentrated in central government - ie remembered the problems with General Gage around Boston prior to Lexington and Concord.
  3. Assumed that individuals, not any government, were responsible for their personal security, and by implication the security of the area immediately near them. This included every threat from the local criminals to pirates to the Native Americans.
The key point that the banners love to overlook was that this was a Bring-Your-Own-Gun Army. The word regulated dealt with having the proper personal weapons available.

In the 21st Century situation, it would mean that every male (and every female) in the age range (18-45 or so) would be required to have an M16, M4, M9 Pistol, M249 SAW, or M2 (or perhaps older weapons like the Springfield or Model 1917 rifles or Colt/Lewis Machineguns from World War I, M1 Rifle, M1 Carbine, M14 Rifle, M60 Machine Gun, M1911 Pistol, M3 (Grease Gun), M1928 Thompson, M1918 BAR) etc., and bring them to the meetings at regular times to have them inspected and do some basic defensive training.
GHF is offline  
Old December 26, 2009, 10:49 AM   #16
Tennessee Gentleman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,611
I read a very interesting commentary from a anitgun guy (can't remember his name) that said if we still had the militia system in place we had in 1789 (which we don't) then neither anti nor pro gun folk would not like it.

The antis would be upset because ordinary folk would privately own FA and other military type weapons.

The pro-gunners would not like it because of the controls and inconveniences placed on them for mandatory (with penalities imposed for non-compliance) training and upkeep of the weapons.

Indeed, it was those very "inconveniences" that killed the militia system. Military life has really never been popular in the US unlike, say Germany, and our folk don't like that type of discipline which IMO is why we have an AV military.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted."
Anonymous Soldier.
Tennessee Gentleman is offline  
Old December 26, 2009, 11:25 AM   #17
rwilson452
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 10, 2004
Location: Tioga co. PA
Posts: 2,361
A post earlier mentioned logistics. I would add, "Tacticians study battles, strategist study logistics". I don't know who said it but it is very true.

I believe Mahan's "Sea Power" is still required reading at the naval academy. What he says holds true in desert warfare and to an extent all warfare.
__________________
USNRET '61-'81
rwilson452 is offline  
Old December 26, 2009, 11:27 AM   #18
publius42
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 9, 2002
Posts: 1,887
Wow, I just turned 45, so I'm off the hook. Funny, I don't feel too old to be useful.
publius42 is offline  
Old December 26, 2009, 11:30 AM   #19
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,686
I would disagree about why we have an all-volunteer army. It was the fallout of VietNam where many were drafted for an unsuccessful war and those in the know avoided the draft if they didn't want to go.

Given the climate change for equality - a continuing draft would have had to reach into all classes and the commonly used deferments and special privileged entry into the National Guard would not be allowed.

Thus, an AV army avoided sending all to war. Also, we haven't needed the massive number of troops - yet!

All males and females having a military quality weapons at home would be a nightmare to monitor. We are not as cultural coherent as Switzerland. The expense of training and controlling these guns would be horrific.

If the Martians land or climate change ends our civilization, worry about it then. The possibility of such a need for a massive armed force isn't really likely.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old December 26, 2009, 11:39 AM   #20
Tennessee Gentleman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,611
Quote:
Originally Posted by publius42
Wow, I just turned 45, so I'm off the hook.
You young whipper-snapper! Don't worry, nobody is going to need US to repel any invaders soon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer
I would disagree about why we have an all-volunteer army. It was the fallout of VietNam where many were drafted for an unsuccessful war and those in the know avoided the draft if they didn't want to go.
Now this is a topic we could really go on about but it would be a different thread. Actually, Vietnam was the excuse THIS time. Drafts have always been very unpopular in peacetime and war as well. See Draft Riots in NY during the Civil War. America's populace has always been very anti-militaristic even though it's policies may not not have been.

"Those in the know" as you call them ALWAYS found ways to stay out of the military whether it was paying for a substitute during the Civil War or working in a "defense related" industry during WWII. Americans don't like military life (I can understand that having over 20 years of it myself) and they would much rather pay others to do it for them.

Actually some historians credit the establishment of "mercenary" legions in Rome as the beginning of the end of their empire. Interesting?
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted."
Anonymous Soldier.

Last edited by Tennessee Gentleman; December 26, 2009 at 11:43 AM. Reason: historical comment
Tennessee Gentleman is offline  
Old December 26, 2009, 12:25 PM   #21
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,686
In today's Internet society - those in the know would have their shennigans for their kids blasted across the media fairly quickly.

A mandatory draft would have e-journalists watching the deferments of politicians and rich guys kids fairly easily.

The composition of the politician's kids NG unit in Texas, which GWB got in would be known in a zap. Unlike my buddy from Lubbock who couldn't get in the Guard and went off to Viet Nam.

Back to the original OP - if every male had an M4 carbine here in TX, how many would cross the border in a flash for sale? In Iraq, the guns we gave them vanished into the private market. So, how often to we check in the guns, punish those who lose them? What a mess!

Let those who are legally motivated to own guns have them, IMHO.

Yep, we do have Katrina's and I do worry about government tyranny but I'm not OK with mandatory military weaponery for all. Imagine the reality shows then!!
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old December 26, 2009, 12:32 PM   #22
Tennessee Gentleman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer
In today's Internet society - those in the know would have their shennigans for their kids blasted across the media fairly quickly.
Which is why you and I won't see another draft in our lifetime.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glenn E. Meyer
Back to the original OP - if every male had an M4 carbine here in TX, how many would cross the border in a flash for sale? In Iraq, the guns we gave them vanished into the private market. So, how often to we check in the guns, punish those who lose them? What a mess!
BINGO! Many of the folk who are "pro-militia" and post on TFL don't really understand what the militia was. Many are couch potatoes who just want to own scary weaponry to impress themselves and others. The militia is a MILITARY organization not a mob with guns. And those who want these weapons want no part of any military discipline in the main.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted."
Anonymous Soldier.
Tennessee Gentleman is offline  
Old December 26, 2009, 11:39 PM   #23
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,315
Justice Story wrote:
Quote:
The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers.
I bolded the part that I wanted you to take particular note of.

Tennessee Gentleman, and several others wou;ld have us believe that the militia is a dead letter.

To that I give you United Airlines flight #93. Those people acted as and were the militia. They gave their lives so that the terrorists could not complete their mission.

Now we have the most recent example, Jasper Schuringa on Northwest flight #253. The fact that he was a Dutch citizen, means nothing if the definition of militia is: All able-bodied persons acting in concert to thwart an enemy.

In such asymetric warfare, that we find ourselves in today, the need for the citizen militia still exists. Despite living in a world of lethal armed forces and police.

Thomas Cooley wrote, in his General Principles of Constitutional Law (1880):
Quote:
... for to bear arms implies something more than the mere keeping; it implies the learning to handle and use them in a way that makes those who keep them ready for their efficient use; in other words, it implies the right to meet for voluntary discipline in arms, observing in doing so the laws of public order.
So while I generally agree with TG that some State or Local supervision is most likely necessary, it seems as if at least one scholar agrees with the voluntary militias that were mostly disbanded after the severe scrutiny from the OK City bombing.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old December 27, 2009, 01:42 AM   #24
Tennessee Gentleman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antipitas
Tennessee Gentleman, and several others would have us believe that the militia is a dead letter.
I would indeed. The militia that existed in 1789 and the 2A prefatory clause identified is no more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Antipitas
To that I give you United Airlines flight #93. Those people acted as and were the militia.
While very brave people they were not militia. I think we debated this once with a guy named Jon Roland when we explained that militia is a noun not a verb. A militia is a system that produces military units composed of ordinary citizens. It is not a mob with guns, a posse, or a group of folk that band together spontaneously for self defense purposes. Civic virtue is not militia either.

Justice Story was a learned man and so was Mr. Cooley and while their words are nice they do not represent the facts of what the militia in the US ever was.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Antipitas
In such asymetric warfare, that we find ourselves in today, the need for the citizen militia still exists.
Here, we have some marginal agreement. I would say rather: In such asymetric warfare, that we find ourselves in today, the need for armed citizens still exist for self-defense. WIth more Ft. Hood "lone wolf" type incidents on the rise the need for civilians IMHO to be armed and trained in SD is necessary and I think the American People are beginning to see that. But that is not a militia and the danger we face with citizens being armed is that if not careful these citizens may actually hamper anti-terrorist actions by our LEOs and military.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Antipitas
it seems as if at least one scholar agrees with the voluntary militias that were mostly disbanded after the severe scrutiny from the OK City bombing.
Those organizations you speak of are not militias but rather unauthorized paramilitary organizations.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted."
Anonymous Soldier.
Tennessee Gentleman is offline  
Old December 27, 2009, 07:03 AM   #25
alloy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2008
Posts: 1,931
Quote:
guess nobody wanted to look at this possability, no matter
No, it's an interesting question, but they always end the same way.
__________________
Quote:
The uncomfortable question common to all who have had revolutionary changes imposed on them: are we now to accept what was done to us just because it was done?
Angelo Codevilla
alloy is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14598 seconds with 7 queries