Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : WORLD WAR III -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Street who wrote (302)	3/13/1999 10:19:00 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 765

Street, After all the arguing and trashing of each other we've been through, it is reassuring to know we have finally found common ground... :0) What a president might want (any president), and what that president gets, are two different things. American soldiers/sailors are volunteers, not draftees. Thus, they are more free-thinking and willing to take the stance: "This isn't what I signed on for". The key is not to provide the scenario that would convince the military that they have to get involved. And that is why I find myself concerned about the anti-govt mentality of some members of militia movements. Confrontation can lead to unleashing a scenario not favorable to preserving our civil rights. There aren't too many soldiers/sailors who desire anarchy over order. And if it requires the temporary confiscation of weapons from unruly citizens, I frankly have to admit I would favor it under order could be restored and cooler heads prevail. But once order is restored, I would also return weapons to those people who were not unruly or threatening violence. Regards, Ron

To: The Street who wrote (302)	3/13/1999 5:42:00 PM
From: delong	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 765

I think you would hard pressed for the military to stand for it under any administration. I have 13 buddies in the military, all branches. These arent jack booting robots, these are normal Americans who would see quite clearly, maybe more clearly than most, what was happening. Any President who would seek to subvert the Constitution would certainly have a Civil War, and I think the fighting would start not in the streets, but on military bases. On the subject of the dismissal of the 2nd amendment, that is a frightening bending of the intentions of the Bill of Rights which is all too accepted. The Bill of Rights has been twisted so that it has come to be seen as a means of government to protect broad interests, instead of what it is, which is the Constitutional provisions which protect individuals from the government.