Answer: It won't be just the military...
Bumped: New Information from Curtis regarding the OathKeepers, here.
I have had beef with OathKeepers from day one, regarding the unconstitutional acts they perform every day, right now...and the value of their promise not to do so in the future.
But new intel is new intel, here.
The article is worth the read.
Here is one excerpt. The question asked was in 1994 and asked to active duty Marines.
Cunningham’s question: “Consider the following statement: I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government.” The result: “42.3 percent strongly disagreed with this statement; 19.3 percent disagreed; 18.6 percent agreed; 7.6 percent strongly agreed; and 12.0 percent had no opinion.” This equates to approximately 61% of Marines saying they would defy orders to turn their weapons on US citizens in order to disarm them; 26% saying they would not disobey such orders; and 12% refusing to say one way or the other, which means you could probably add them to the 26% who would not disobey orders to turn their weapons on American citizens.
I still haven't rec'd an answer from OathKeepers that I asked more than a year ago: Your members promise not to follow unconstitutional orders at some future date, so how do your active duty LEO handle drug cases, 2A cases, do they participate in random violations of 4A...
Funny, I have not seen one report in the media or even on a blog of a LEO resigning rather than violating his oath. When it comes to the military, I would suggest that you hope for the best, and prepare to be fired upon...
And remember Rich T's comment from another thread (I'm paraphrasing): Do not forget about PMC's (Private Military Companies) that earn their money from the same people as do LEO and the military.
Here is the story.
Kerodin
III
