Dick Metcalf controversy

[MT2008]

Sorry to disappear; I've been busy. It's not that I've been away from IMFDB; just constantly getting distracted whenever I try to muster the energy to concentrate on writing a response. Plus, I sense that I'm playing with fire.

Originally Posted by SPEMack618

I have been on bouts of extended active duty here as of late. Like, above and beyond the one weekend/two weeks a year type deal. Some of that was OCS, and the other part was I got picked to be part of the liaison team between the 3rd ID and the 48th BCT, which involved a lot of active duty work. (and a lot of beer at the Soldier's Club)

You commissioned? Congrats! One of these days, I may have to ask you about your experiences with that (I'm having serious trouble just getting MEPS to cooperate with my application to USAR because I already applied to the Air Force).

Originally Posted by SPEMack618

I don't think the Government should necessarily be afraid of the people, but should realize that they govern with the consent of the govern, are answerable to the citizenry, and that the citizens, if the need arise may use their lawfully held private arms to depose a corrupt regime.

Right, but the problem is, how do you define "corrupt" regime, and who determines when it is time to overthrow it? The current administration has committed a number of acts that many of its opponents regard as evidence of "corruption". I am generally sympathetic to many of those claims. The question is, do those actions give us the right to try and overthrow the administration with our lawfully-held arms?

(And as I am sure you understand, this is a rhetorical question. As a commissioned officer in the U.S. military, I don't expect you to advocate overthrowing your commander-in-chief on the Internet.)

[SPEMack618]

MT, its fine. I have been off saving Atlanta from the snow.

Will post more detailed response in Tuesday.

[Spartan198]

Originally Posted by SPEMack618

MT, its fine. I have been off saving Atlanta from the snow.

Atlanta has bigger problems than snow these days.

[Jcordell]

It's a thorny issue isn't it. there are over 50,000 people living in the city where I live and work. There are 68 sworn officers with my agency. At any given time there are no more than 12-17 uniformed officers working the streets. This is Idaho. A quiet state, but very gun heavy. Probably as much as Texas ,per capita (is that right?), but we don't advertise like Texas. A safe bet that at least half of the population has one or two firearms in the house. If only 25% of those folks have ammo and know how to shoot I and my fellow officers are wildly outnumbered and outgunned.

But we do our job without that being a concern. Why? Because most of the citizens want us out there. They're busy and the don't have the time or inclination to do the job. So they pay me and my fellow officers to do it. We have the support of the majority of the population. We walk a fine line. Piss everybody off and we're gone - whoosh. Am I afraid of the people? No. Are there individuals in the government who are? Yes. Are there folks who want to participate in an armed insurrection? Yes indeed. And if some of them got in charge they'd make the current crop look like really nice people. Good and bad on both sides.

It's a thorny issue. No easy answers.