• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Would you shoot your fellow Americans?

Would you shoot your fellow Americans?


  • Total voters
    31

Wake

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
18,536
Reaction score
2,438
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
This thread topic stems from the conversations gathered in the thread at the bottom of this post.

Basically it's about civillians taking up arms against the government should the government start becoming tyrannical.

Somewhere along the way in that thread, it was mentiond that the U.S. military could squash any sort of rebellion. Mow them down.

So I gots a question. If God forbid you're a soldier and you're ever ordered by your leaders to shoot fellow Americans, would you?

Likewise, if you were a soldier, or even if you're a civillians, if you were given that sort of order as a soldier, what would you do?

I'm asking this question 'cause I want to have some sense of security, knowing that our American soldiers won't be turned against us.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/gun-control/138913-guns-revolution-not-real-real.html#post1061002943
 
It very much depends on what each side is fighting for.
 
It very much depends on what each side is fighting for.

Understandable. I'm meaning if there was ever a revolution/rebellion against an increasingly tyrannical government. If it were something like American terrorists attacking government buildings/whatever, it'd make sense for troops to combat them.
 
Understandable. I'm meaning if there was ever a revolution/rebellion against an increasingly tyrannical government. If it were something like American terrorists attacking government buildings/whatever, it'd make sense for troops to combat them.

I would likely do my best to defend myself and my family, but I can't see myself joining a militia or military troop.
 
Firing on civs is not a lawful order.
 
I agree with Tess, it depends on what what we are fighting for and if the civilians are part of some kind of armed faction.
 
There are things i wont do. Makes me u fit to be a soldier.

Dont come arou d my spot with bad intentions though.
 
If I were a soldier I wouldn't kill fellow Americans if they were fighting against an increasingly tyrannical government. I'd join them if those leaders think they'd pit me against our own.
 
If I were a soldier I wouldn't kill fellow Americans if they were fighting against an increasingly tyrannical government. I'd join them if those leaders think they'd pit me against our own.

Have you been thinking of joining a militia?
 
Why would there be a revolution? Providing Health care for poor people, would that be a good reason for you to start shooting fellow americans?

Are you so against this rightwing idea, Obamacare, that you would go to war to prevent it?

You do know it was created by the most rightwing think tank in America, dont you?
 
Why would there be a revolution? Providing Health care for poor people, would that be a good reason for you to start shooting fellow americans?

Are you so against this rightwing idea, Obamacare, that you would go to war to prevent it?

You do know it was created by the most rightwing think tank in America, dont you?

What are you talking about? Seems to me like you're going off on a tangent.

So, please answer my question:

If you were/are a soldier, and were ordered to shoot any Americans who were revolting against a tyrannical government, what would you do?
 
Again this poll is limited. It does not include just shooting them because you don't like them, they disagree with you or just cause your pissed off.
Anyone who reads the news or watches TV knows this happens far too often.

If I were young enough and we were in a civil war and I was ordered to fight. Yes I would
Otherwise hell no.

PS I have had a gun pointed at my face (loaded) and been shot at and I am still here.
 
I was JUST talking about this with someone in a totally unrelated thread. Eerie timing.

Anyway, I'm no soldier, but if I were, I agree that it would depend on what the fight was about.

It's really hard to say what an individual might do or how they might feel about the situation. Personal ideology would have to figure into it, I'm sure. Depending on whether the revolt was a conservative, Tea Party-like revolt against overbearing government intervention over liberty, or a liberal, Occupy Wallstreet-like revolt against government not intervening enough to provide things for the citizenry.

Different people may interpret each of those revolts, respectively, as either traitorous or patriotic.

Me, I don't think I'd shoot an American for any reason unless they presented a direct threat to the safety of myself or someone else.
 
This thread topic stems from the conversations gathered in the thread at the bottom of this post.

Basically it's about civillians taking up arms against the government should the government start becoming tyrannical.

Somewhere along the way in that thread, it was mentiond that the U.S. military could squash any sort of rebellion. Mow them down.

So I gots a question. If God forbid you're a soldier and you're ever ordered by your leaders to shoot fellow Americans, would you?

Likewise, if you were a soldier, or even if you're a civillians, if you were given that sort of order as a soldier, what would you do?

I'm asking this question 'cause I want to have some sense of security, knowing that our American soldiers won't be turned against us.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/gun-control/138913-guns-revolution-not-real-real.html#post1061002943


Eric Holder: Yes, We Can Kill American Citizens Without Trial
WASHINGTON — Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. asserted on Monday that it is lawful for the government to kill American citizens if officials deem them to be operational leaders of Al Qaeda who are planning attacks on the United States and if capturing them alive is not feasible.

No trial by jury, no peers present to defend you.....

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr1540enr/pdf/BILLS-112hr1540enr.pdf
H. R. 1540—265
required by subsection (a), the Comptroller General of the United
States shall submit to Congress an assessment by the Comptroller
General of the report, including a determination whether or not
the report complies with applicable best practices.
Subtitle D—Counterterrorism
SEC. 1021. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF
THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS
PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY
FORCE.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Congress affirms that the authority of the
President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to
the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40;
50 U.S.C. 1541 note) includes the authority for the Armed Forces
of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection
(b)) pending disposition under the law of war.
(b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under this section
is any person as follows:
(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided
the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001,
or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported
al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged
in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners,
including any person who has committed a belligerent act or
has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy
forces.
(c) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—The disposition of a
person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may
include the following:
(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until
the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for
Use of Military Force.
(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States
Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009
(title XVIII of Public Law 111–84)).
(3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent
tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.
(4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person’s country
of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.
(d) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section is intended to limit
or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the
Authorization for Use of Military Force.
(e) AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be construed
to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of
United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States,
or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United
States.
(f) REQUIREMENT FOR BRIEFINGS OF CONGRESS.—The Secretary
of Defense shall regularly brief Congress regarding the application
of the authority described in this section, including the organizations,
entities, and individuals considered to be ‘‘covered persons’’
for purposes of subsection (b)(2).
 
Firing on civs is not a lawful order.

It is if martial law has been declared, which is the only time the US military should be involved in a domestic matter. Posse Comitatus.
 
It is if martial law has been declared, which is the only time the US military should be involved in a domestic matter. Posse Comitatus.

Marial law does not render firing on a civilian a legal order. If someone is trying to shoot me, no one needs to tell me to engage.
 
Depends, only time we've ever had a civil war, it was fueled by one side's admitted belief that they had a god given right to own slaves and the other side's refusal to accept such a claim. As we no longer have that kind of wedge issue, there's no reason for me to even consider killing any American over anything. What am I going to shoot another American over? RomneyCare? Flat tax? Global warming? Evolution? Lol, get serious.
 
No, not unless I was being fired upon.

This thread topic stems from the conversations gathered in the thread at the bottom of this post.

Basically it's about civillians taking up arms against the government should the government start becoming tyrannical.

Somewhere along the way in that thread, it was mentiond that the U.S. military could squash any sort of rebellion. Mow them down.

So I gots a question. If God forbid you're a soldier and you're ever ordered by your leaders to shoot fellow Americans, would you?

Likewise, if you were a soldier, or even if you're a civillians, if you were given that sort of order as a soldier, what would you do?

I'm asking this question 'cause I want to have some sense of security, knowing that our American soldiers won't be turned against us.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/gun-control/138913-guns-revolution-not-real-real.html#post1061002943
 
Marial law does not render firing on a civilian a legal order. If someone is trying to shoot me, no one needs to tell me to engage.

Yes, it does indeed, that's exactly what it means. Never heard of the Civil War?
 
Yes, it does indeed, that's exactly what it means. Never heard of the Civil War?

Martial law does not mean all civilians are fair game to be shot. No, I never heard of the Civil War.
 
This thread topic stems from the conversations gathered in the thread at the bottom of this post.

Basically it's about civillians taking up arms against the government should the government start becoming tyrannical.

Somewhere along the way in that thread, it was mentiond that the U.S. military could squash any sort of rebellion. Mow them down.

So I gots a question. If God forbid you're a soldier and you're ever ordered by your leaders to shoot fellow Americans, would you?

Likewise, if you were a soldier, or even if you're a civillians, if you were given that sort of order as a soldier, what would you do?

I'm asking this question 'cause I want to have some sense of security, knowing that our American soldiers won't be turned against us.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/gun-control/138913-guns-revolution-not-real-real.html#post1061002943

First of all, this is not without precedent. Look up Kent State, assuming you think the National Guard is the same as an American soldier, which, of course, it is. And it's not as far-fetched as people might think. In the case of massive riots, I could well picture the National Guard being called in -- even the Army being called in -- if civil unrest got really, really bad.

I would hope that American soldiers would obey orders to quell violence in a big city, as an example. Or, a massive organized assault on the White House, as another. If they had to shoot their guns to quell it? So be it.

To think that American soldiers would never fire on American citizens is kind of silly. If the need arises, they would and should.

The rather scarey thing about it is that I'm not entirely confident that our soldiers would be told the truth.
 
Why would there be a revolution? Providing Health care for poor people, would that be a good reason for you to start shooting fellow americans?

Are you so against this rightwing idea, Obamacare, that you would go to war to prevent it?

You do know it was created by the most rightwing think tank in America, dont you?

That is untrue. The Heritage Foundation put together an 11-page idea for nationalized healthcare. Big freakin' deal. It morphed into a 2,700-page creation of a Democratic president.

The Heritage Foundation's paper did not include an individual mandate, nor an employer mandate, an expansion of Medicaid, Medicare cuts, an Independent Payment Advisory Board.

Pulllleeeze. You show you have talking points. Read the facts behind those and you'll learn something.

http://blog.heritage.org/2012/03/01/point-by-point-the-case-against-obamacare/
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom