• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Retired Military Brass Lend support for gun control

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Sixteen of our nation’s senior military officers recently penned a letter to Congress under the banner of the Giffords (sic) Veteran Coalition. They chose to lend their military authority and prestige to assist an ongoing political effort to further restrict their fellow law-abiding American citizens’ Constitutional right to keep and bear arms because they mistakenly believe they know how to reduce criminal misuse of firearms.

The retired military leaders, who of course deserve accolades for leading forces in combat and humanitarian operations, cited the recent tragedy in Sutherland Springs, Texas, to call for more gun control laws. Unfortunately, they never mentioned that our nation’s military itself had the tools to prevent this tragedy from ever happening but failed tragically in that mission.

The Sutherland murderer had been convicted of domestic violence in a court-martial and involuntarily committed to a mental health facility before being booted from the Air Force with a bad conduct discharge. At least two of these instances would have been enough to bar the murderer from buying a firearm. But the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) was not informed of these facts because the Department of Defense never submitted the required disqualifying records. Because of DoD’s failure to follow its own regulations and our nation’s laws, this murderer was able to buy guns not just once, but four separate times. Each time he passed the background check.

https://bearingarms.com/tom-k/2017/12/14/nssf-takes-retired-generals-engaged-gun-grabbing-nonsense/

addendum:
In a letter they plan to send to Congressional leaders, the retired commanders, including Army Gen. Wesley Clark, Navy Admiral Eric T. Olson, Marine Brig. Gen. Stephen A. Cheney, and Air Force Gen. Michael V. Hayden and Lt. Gen. Norman R. Seip argue that Congress is “no longer speaking or voting for the majority of Americans, including gun owners” when it comes to the issue of firearms...


...Retired Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal said he agrees.

http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=138956
 
Last edited:

Maverick9

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
1,404
Location
Mid-atlantic
Basically, they're a disgrace.

Specifically, the op-ed piece nails it, saying:

When these officers took this stand, however, they undermined their own sacred oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. They have failed to bear true faith and allegiance to the same. They blew it.

They have betrayed their oaths, and for what? Some misguided notion that Americans can’t be trusted with firearms?
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
What was the intention of the 2A at the time it was written? It is not surprising that these long time government overlords fear the unwashed bearing arms.
 

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
782
Location
Central Ky.
What was the intention of the 2A at the time it was written? It is not surprising that these long time government overlords fear the unwashed bearing arms.

Another bullseye for Walking Wolf. Short, to the point and exactly correct.

If a gun confiscation were to ever come, who do you think would be doing the confiscating? Surely, you don't think Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Shumer will be knocking on your door and looking through your closets, do you?
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,936
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
National crisis? What national crisis? There is no national crisis. It's a fabrication. Crime is lower than ever. When I was a kid the local and national news was delivered in less than 15 minutes. The news department was not a profit center. And today it is. Instant car chase coverage from LA beamed world wide in real time.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
It’s #FakeNews engendered and delivered by such as Drudge. I access Drudge only throughhis link on SH*TL*RD HUB. See his current masthead image of the exPOTUS & FLOTUS to get your mind right.

are you all right?

what on earth does your above posted garbled gobbledygook even mean as related to the cost of haggis in WI?
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,461
Location
Florida
National crisis? What national crisis? There is no national crisis. It's a fabrication. Crime is lower than ever. When I was a kid the local and national news was delivered in less than 15 minutes. The news department was not a profit center. And today it is. Instant car chase coverage from LA beamed world wide in real time.

exactly. it's nothing new, it's just more instantaneous coverage of typical events. plus extended distribution channels through personal video cameras ie cellphones.

there's more guns in circulation than legal people to carry them. or close enough. it's about 110-120 guns per 100 people. if there were a crisis, there would be a revolution already.
 

SFCRetired

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
1,764
Location
Montgomery, Alabama, USA
Any commissioned or noncommissioned officer, active duty, reserves, or retired, who advocates violation of any part of the United States Constitution is in violation of his/her oath.

Granted that I am not a lawyer, but it would seem to me that such a violation of one's oath would come under Article 133 of the UCMJ which defines "conduct unbecoming." Article 133 makes "conduct unbecoming" a courts martial offense.

Before someone says it: A retired officer or noncommissioned officer is still subject to the UCMJ and can be recalled to active duty for purposes of a court martial.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
9,315
Location
here nc
Any commissioned or noncommissioned officer, active duty, reserves, or retired, who advocates violation of any part of the United States Constitution is in violation of his/her oath.

Granted that I am not a lawyer, but it would seem to me that such a violation of one's oath would come under Article 133 of the UCMJ which defines "conduct unbecoming." Article 133 makes "conduct unbecoming" a courts martial offense.

Before someone says it: A retired officer or noncommissioned officer is still subject to the UCMJ and can be recalled to active duty for purposes of a court martial.

Well stated, but...
who within the military chain of command has the cajones to initiate such action...remember tom cruise only role played a military defense jag...reality is a rough truth to handle!
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
...

Before someone says it: A retired officer or noncommissioned officer is still subject to the UCMJ and can be recalled to active duty for purposes of a court martial.
Can you provide a cite? I am retired and I am no longer subject to the UCMJ or Navy Regulations manual.
 

SFCRetired

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
1,764
Location
Montgomery, Alabama, USA
Can you provide a cite? I am retired and I am no longer subject to the UCMJ or Navy Regulations manual.

According to Article 2 of the UCMJ: "Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay" are subject to the UCMJ.

The opinion expressed by most of the articles I saw was that it was highly unlikely for a retiree to be called back to active duty. Personal opinion: I think that any officer or NCO who violates their oath should be recalled and face a court martial.

As I understand it, the determining factor is that you are drawing reduced pay for nominal service.
 

CJ4wd

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2017
Messages
353
Location
Planet Earth
What was the intention of the 2A at the time it was written? It is not surprising that these long time government overlords fear the unwashed bearing arms.
Any commissioned or noncommissioned officer, active duty, reserves, or retired, who advocates violation of any part of the United States Constitution is in violation of his/her oath.
Granted that I am not a lawyer, but it would seem to me that such a violation of one's oath would come under Article 133 of the UCMJ which defines "conduct unbecoming." Article 133 makes "conduct unbecoming" a courts martial offense.
Before someone says it: A retired officer or noncommissioned officer is still subject to the UCMJ and can be recalled to active duty for purposes of a court martial.

Well said.
Of course, you have to wonder if senility has set in these "gentlemen". Or could it be Alzheimer's? :question:
 

SFCRetired

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
1,764
Location
Montgomery, Alabama, USA
Well said.
Of course, you have to wonder if senility has set in these "gentlemen". Or could it be Alzheimer's? :question:

Possibly, but I wouldn't wish either one on my worst enemy. I was a caregiver, along with my late wife, of an Alzheimer's patient.

One other comment; as to who has the cojones to recall any retiree back to AD to answer charges: The Commander-in-Chief. And this President has both the authority and the cojones to act.
 
Top