U.S. Soldiers now raiding U.S. gun shops

[Blackhawk2001]

The problem I'm having with my opposition on this thread is that, while they have some deeply held beliefs that I share, pretty much all they've done in this thread is say "That's the way I feel about it and you should too!" They haven't advanced any particular arguments about the "federal agent bureaucracy" being too big, or that agents of the Air Force don't have a valid reason to pursue their investigations off Air Force property (I'm mean, they SAY that, but they don't say why that should be so) and in general are getting all upset because they haven't made a good case that we can agree with.

Rambone and others like to sandbag us with misleading "thread-lines" intended to get us all upset - and then when we discover it's not all that upsetting, he gets upset. Or maybe he just likes to fight - I'm not sure.

Make a reasoned argument for your cause and maybe I can take you off my "Ignore" list.

 

[BumpShadow]

The problem I'm having with my opposition on this thread is that, while they have some deeply held beliefs that I share, pretty much all they've done in this thread is say "That's the way I feel about it and you should too!" They haven't advanced any particular arguments about the "federal agent bureaucracy" being too big, or that agents of the Air Force don't have a valid reason to pursue their investigations off Air Force property (I'm mean, they SAY that, but they don't say why that should be so) and in general are getting all upset because they haven't made a good case that we can agree with.

Rambone and others like to sandbag us with misleading "thread-lines" intended to get us all upset - and then when we discover it's not all that upsetting, he gets upset. Or maybe he just likes to fight - I'm not sure.

Make a reasoned argument for your cause and maybe I can take you off my "Ignore" list.

It makes more sense when you understand where rambone is getting these articles. He's getting them from Prison Planet or Infowars, websites run by Alex Jones. Mr. Jones does cite very insightful articles from time to time, but much of the articles are knee jerk alarmist hoopla. It's important to do your own research when reading Alex Jones. He sometimes hits the nail on the head though, like with Rick Perry for example.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

The problem I'm having with my opposition on this thread is that, while they have some deeply held beliefs that I share, pretty much all they've done in this thread is say "That's the way I feel about it and you should too!" They haven't advanced any particular arguments about the "federal agent bureaucracy" being too big, or that agents of the Air Force don't have a valid reason to pursue their investigations off Air Force property (I'm mean, they SAY that, but they don't say why that should be so) and in general are getting all upset because they haven't made a good case that we can agree with.

Rambone and others like to sandbag us with misleading "thread-lines" intended to get us all upset - and then when we discover it's not all that upsetting, he gets upset. Or maybe he just likes to [STRIKE]fight[/STRIKE] troll - I'm not sure.

Make a reasoned argument for your cause and maybe I can take you off my "Ignore" list.

FTFY

My name is Semper Fi and I feed the trolls. I've been feeding the trolls for about a year now ...

 

[Expat]

My name is Semper Fi and I feed the trolls. I've been feeding the trolls for about a year now ...

The Group all together: Hi Semper Fi

 

[Blackhawk2001]

FTFY

My name is Semper Fi and I feed the trolls. I've been feeding the trolls for about a year now ...

That wasn't a word I wanted to use because I'm not certain that's what he intends, even if the results are the same. I'm still waiting to hear some reasoned arguments from him or his like-minded posters.

 

[Expat]

That wasn't a word I wanted to use because I'm not certain that's what he intends, even if the results are the same. I'm still waiting to hear some reasoned arguments from him or his like-minded posters.

I would advise not holding your breath.

 

[jeremy]

That wasn't a word I wanted to use because I'm not certain that's what he intends, even if the results are the same. I'm still waiting to hear some reasoned arguments from him or his like-minded posters.

 

[flatlander]

That wasn't a word I wanted to use because I'm not certain that's what he intends, even if the results are the same. I'm still waiting to hear some reasoned arguments from him or his like-minded posters.

Calling it the way a lot of us see it

Bob

 

[steveh_131]

The problem I'm having with my opposition on this thread is that, while they have some deeply held beliefs that I share, pretty much all they've done in this thread is say "That's the way I feel about it and you should too!" They haven't advanced any particular arguments about the "federal agent bureaucracy" being too big, or that agents of the Air Force don't have a valid reason to pursue their investigations off Air Force property (I'm mean, they SAY that, but they don't say why that should be so) and in general are getting all upset because they haven't made a good case that we can agree with.

I've said it multiple times now.

It is not necessary for me to provide a reason why a government agency should not exist or should not intrude in our lives. We should start from the assumption that these agencies should not exist until provided a good reason why they SHOULD exist or why they SHOULD have any role in civilian life.

My argument is that the local agencies are sufficient to carry out a raid for stolen property that isn't dangerous by nature. The Air Force does not need to participate in a raid on civilian property.

Tell me why I'm wrong.

 

[rambone]

The problem I'm having with my opposition on this thread is that, while they have some deeply held beliefs that I share, pretty much all they've done in this thread is say "That's the way I feel about it and you should too!" They haven't advanced any particular arguments about the "federal agent bureaucracy" being too big, or that agents of the Air Force don't have a valid reason to pursue their investigations off Air Force property (I'm mean, they SAY that, but they don't say why that should be so) and in general are getting all upset because they haven't made a good case that we can agree with.

I'm entering this thread with the inherent belief that military & police duties should be separate. Really really separate. Both serve a distinct role in a free republic, but mixing them is not conducive to our sustained freedom. I don't like seeing police morphing into a paramilitary force, and I don't like seeing military take on the role of local police. I think history has shown us enough reasons to avoid these societal models.

I also think that allowing the Federal Government to intervene in mundane local matters is also not conducive to keeping our free republic. Crime should be handled always by the most local jurisdiction possible. Living under innumerable Federal laws, accompanied by scores of Federal enforcers, is a signal that we are giving up the concept of Federalism and moving toward a top-down Federal dictatorship. The Union is weakened every time the Feds supersede locals on matters such as this.

If the Air Force is to have a police force then I think they should not perform any duties outside the walls of their assigned base. I think most or all of the other Federal enforcement agencies are unconstitutional along with the laws they seek to enforce. Where in Article 1 Section 8 does the Constitution give the Feds the power to track down thieves? I think it the best solution for preserving a free republic is to keep the enforcement local.

I'm sorry this thread got so sidetracked with my mistaken use of the word soldier and lack of attention to the intricacies of quasi-military bureaucracies such as NCIS and AFOSI. But hopefully we can agree on some of my above points and post together in peace & harmony.

 

[BumpShadow]

I've said it multiple times now.

It is not necessary for me to provide a reason why a government agency should not exist or should not intrude in our lives. We should start from the assumption that these agencies should not exist until provided a good reason why they SHOULD exist or why they SHOULD have any role in civilian life.

My argument is that the local agencies are sufficient to carry out a raid for stolen property that isn't dangerous by nature. The Air Force does not need to participate in a raid on civilian property.

Tell me why I'm wrong.

I disagree. What you implying is a massive upset of system. It doesn't matter if you agree with the system or not, a upset on the level your talking about needs to be justified. If you can't articulate your beliefs, then maybe you should figure out how to before blastly the blogshere with a belief system you can't even explain to others.

Simple saying that government is evil, and bigger government is evil-er, and that by opposing any government action automatically makes you right doesn't cut it. Government can be bad, yes. It can also be good. Big government can be bad, but so can small government.

 

[steveh_131]

I disagree. What you implying is a massive upset of system. It doesn't matter if you agree with the system or not, a upset on the level your talking about needs to be justified. If you can't articulate your beliefs, then maybe you should figure out how to before blastly the blogshere with a belief system you can't even explain to others.

Simple saying that government is evil, and bigger government is evil-er, and that by opposing any government action automatically makes you right doesn't cut it. Government can be bad, yes. It can also be good. Big government can be bad, but so can small government.

If you don't agree that a government should be as small as is absolutely necessary, then there is no point in further discussion. I base every argument I make upon that assumption.

We would have to make a whole new thread to argue that point!

 

[UncleMike]

If you don't agree that a government should be as small as is absolutely necessary, then there is no point in further discussion. I base every argument I make upon that assumption.

We would have to make a whole new thread to argue that point!

The smallest possible government is a Dictatorship!!

 

[steveh_131]

The smallest possible government is a Dictatorship!!

Are you serious?

 

[BumpShadow]

If you don't agree that a government should be as small as is absolutely necessary, then there is no point in further discussion. I base every argument I make upon that assumption.

We would have to make a whole new thread to argue that point!

Well, not to thread-jack or anything, but I believe that has already been tried.

Articles of the Confederation

If memory serves, it didn't work out too well.

 

[rambone]

It can also be good.

Source?

 

[steveh_131]

Edit: Nvm. Being nice.

 

[BumpShadow]

Edit: Nvm. Being nice.

Is it really so hard to articulate your beliefs without blowing up? If you have logic and common sense on your side it should be easy.

As for the separation of military and police, what does it matter if they both look similar to one another? Its what chain of command is used that's important. And that we have. I see no problem with Air Force working with state and federal police to get back stolen property. Even its it not lethal, that still leaves the door open to alot of stuff that would not be good in the wrong hands. I talking about maintenance manuals, operation manuals, that sort of thing.

 

[steveh_131]

Is it really so hard to articulate your beliefs without blowing up? If you have logic and common sense on your side it should be easy.

I did.

I've said it multiple times now.

It is not necessary for me to provide a reason why a government agency should not exist or should not intrude in our lives. We should start from the assumption that these agencies should not exist until provided a good reason why they SHOULD exist or why they SHOULD have any role in civilian life.

My argument is that the local agencies are sufficient to carry out a raid for stolen property that isn't dangerous by nature. The Air Force does not need to participate in a raid on civilian property.

Tell me why I'm wrong.

 

[steveh_131]

The smallest possible government is a Dictatorship!!

Well, not to thread-jack or anything, but I believe that has already been tried.

Articles of the Confederation

If memory serves, it didn't work out too well.

So one of you has decided that I am supporting a dictatorship and the other has decided that I am supporting bringing back the Articles of Confederation.

You guys are a trip.