Here's a Hypothetical:

[Mookster]

You live in the United States. Economic downfall and crimes against civil rights have lead to revolt amongst middle and lower class citizens. The economic downfall of these classes is largly due to over taxing on citizens and businesses, causing smaller businesses to crumble and corporate businesses to downsize their employee base. The government asserts that it is necessary to wage multiple wars for the defense of the nation, however, much of these wars were preemptively started with evidence that is not tangible to the public. This has created more mistrust and friction between the civilian population and the government; the White House is full of lobbyists and bankers, and the people are questioning the true motives of these wars as a result. Like always, military personnel are obligated by law, to act.


To nonmilitary members:
Your government has implemented marshal law. Peaceful protesting is answered by military action and ordered to disperse, creating an ultimatum to either physically fight for your right to protest, or abandon your cause and withdraw. Talk of protest, or any topics that may subsequently lead to protest, has also been treated as reason for consequence by the military.
To military members:
You are ordered to stop peaceful protesting, and committed to do so as it is your sworn oath. If you do not adhere to your orders, you will be punished severely. Your family and you are safe from the kind of treatment that the general public has been absorbing from the government, so long as you continue to be a tool of it.


What would you do?

[CrazyGerbilEater]

quit college and leave the city, head out into the boonies with all my stuff, guns included, and live off the land at one of my buddies place I hunt with(hick central, I can rent out his house(if he'd make me pay anything at all) since he lives in florida currently). I don't want to be in any major city if a riot broke out and they order the military to forcfully put it down, or if they start seizing weapons from innocent civilians.

if stuff got really really bad I'd consider joining any resistance elements that form or form my own. by bad meaning they start killing protesters, and conducting search and seizures on a regular basis on houses.

Also, you don't want to be in any town or city if they started drafting people into militia/army in order to pacify protesters.

of course, this is all if I see demonstrations/protests locally and an increased military presence or police force that begins to act violently to protesters.(locally) Madison(mostly west side) is very liberal so anything like that would spread fairly quickly.

But like I said, it'd take an obvious major move by the government on a nationwide scale or a sudden local rise in oppression for me to make any move. Less obvious opression I'd probaly just be really pissed off and talk to other pissed of people about doing shananigans like paintballing cop cars, breaking into local police/government networks, simple stuff.

[Orchidomegaly]

If I really wanted to make a change I would contribute my time and money to lobbying efforts that reflect my opinions.

Protesting is just a day off work. It almost never does anything anyways.

As long as there are still free elections, which I assume there are since there was no mention of there not being, the politicians will respond to their contingency. I would also make efforts to publicize the corruption, and get people angry enough about what is going on for it to make politicians fear for their jobs. Thats the way a democracy is meant to work.

Now if we had a congress that was turned into werewolves..., that would be another story.

"can we afford silver bullets at this point"?

[Mookster]

If I really wanted to make a change I would contribute my time and money to lobbying efforts that reflect my opinions.

Protesting is just a day off work. It almost never does anything anyways.

As long as there are still free elections, which I assume there are since there was no mention of there not being, the politicians will respond to their contingency. I would also make efforts to publicize the corruption, and get people angry enough about what is going on for it to make politicians fear for their jobs. Thats the way a democracy is meant to work.

Now if we had a congress that was turned into werewolves..., that would be another story.

"can we afford silver bullets at this point"?

Let's say each elected candidate follows the same suit, or there's some sort of reason that leads to an extension of presidential term. Hell, bills that violate your constitutional rights have been rushed through over night before, so why not again?
I think it took less than 8 years for Nazi Germany to reach a similar state as the hypothetical above. So, it's not too far of a stretch.

[Dragan]

Canadia is always safe, nothing happens here. If anything a bunch of draft dodgers from the states will come up here and ruin it for us.

[Aberrant]

The key thing you said is peaceful demonstrations. As long as they were to remain peaceful the only thing the guard would be called on to do is ensure they remained that way. The problem is, there is always some moron that has to escalate it to the next lvl. What should be a peaceful rally showing that the public is upset about the state of affairs ends up being a full scale riot.

We as members of the military are sworn to support and defend the constitution of the united states above all else.

[Orchidomegaly]

Canadia is always safe, nothing happens here. If anything a bunch of draft dodgers from the states will come up here and ruin it for us.

Southpark has taught me everything I need to know about canada.

As far as my right to assemble I really don't value it very much to be honest. It seems that protesting just has a very low success rate. In my opinion protests are done by small, loud minorities.

I believe the pressure would turn to congress to get us out of the wars. The president is only allowed to send troops to an area for 90 days without approval from Congress.

To get Congress to do what we wanted we would have to use the fourth branch of the government, the press.

ABC would criticize any Congressmen that is pro-war, and fox news would piss and moan about taxes until we got a tax return.

[Raistlin]

Mookster, you have no idea how badly I want to add my input to this thread. I'm sorry man, I just can't. There is too much ground to cover and I will look like a crazy person to most people.

[Mookster]

Mookster, you have no idea how badly I want to add my input to this thread. I'm sorry man, I just can't. There is too much ground to cover and I will look like a crazy person to most people.

Go for it. I made it knowing it'd bleed into alot of different topics.

The key thing you said is peaceful demonstrations. As long as they were to remain peaceful the only thing the guard would be called on to do is ensure they remained that way. The problem is, there is always some moron that has to escalate it to the next lvl. What should be a peaceful rally showing that the public is upset about the state of affairs ends up being a full scale riot.

We as members of the military are sworn to support and defend the constitution of the united states above all else.

The other key thing I said was that it's while marshal law is implemented. State of Emergency is similar and could apply too during a time of war. There's also this, to be considered. I know you're sworn to support and defend the constitution above all else, but it sorta doesn't apply anywhere anymore. Which begs the question, what if you've got to shut down a peaceful protest? Also, what if those peaceful protesters begin to fight back because you're shutting them down? Would you consider it a riot at that point? What other options would they have? Do you even have the right to decline an order if it breaches your sworn commitment to preserve the constitutional rights of those citizens? What if you're unsure about whether or not that right will be recognized?

I don't mean to grill you, but I'm curious about what you'd do (as a military fella) in this sort of situation.

The extraordinary authority that the U.S. government possesses at its borders is spilling into regular American streets, affecting large populations of its citizens. Nearly two-thirds of the entire population of the country now lives within 100 miles of the U.S. land and coastal borders, an area that has been designated by the government as a "Constitution Free Zone".

In a Constitution free zone, the powers granted under the Constitution no longer apply. Any person who falls into the sites of the national security apparatus while in a Constitution free zone is on his own. There is no appeal process, no case law, no Bill of Rights protection, no lawyers, and none of what Americans count on to help them when they have become justly or unjustly identified as having done wrong.

[Aberrant]

We have had a thread on the constitution free zone before, I have lived in that zone my entire life with out knowing of it and have never had, nor seen, rights violated. Here again I do not place myself in situations where I could fall into a gray zone either so that might be the reason. Yes it exists, but it is not being abused in as much as I have experience.

The govt would have to have a reason for the martial law, can't just throw it up. If called upon to respond to a civil protest that was peaceful the guard would only stand ground to ensure things continued that way. If the crowd became unruly, and sadly I am sure it would, arrests would be made and the crowd dispersed. There are a lot of unknowns in this scenario so it is hard to give a 100% no BS answer, sorry mook.

Yes we can deny following an order if it violates the constitution, the law of the land, or ethical treatment. In fact you are taught from the time you are in basic training that it is your duty to not follow an order in those situations. All army members attend military law, ethics training and values class while they are in basic in an attempt to make soldiers understand they must do the right thing in all situations.

[K? Pŕo?ćtiόnŹ]

As do the Air Force.

[Mookster]

We have had a thread on the constitution free zone before, I have lived in that zone my entire life with out knowing of it and have never had, nor seen, rights violated. Here again I do not place myself in situations where I could fall into a gray zone either so that might be the reason. Yes it exists, but it is not being abused in as much as I have experience.

The govt would have to have a reason for the martial law, can't just throw it up. If called upon to respond to a civil protest that was peaceful the guard would only stand ground to ensure things continued that way. If the crowd became unruly, and sadly I am sure it would, arrests would be made and the crowd dispersed. There are a lot of unknowns in this scenario so it is hard to give a 100% no BS answer, sorry mook.

Yes we can deny following an order if it violates the constitution, the law of the land, or ethical treatment. In fact you are taught from the time you are in basic training that it is your duty to not follow an order in those situations. All army members attend military law, ethics training and values class while they are in basic in an attempt to make soldiers understand they must do the right thing in all situations.

I know you have, but in those zones the rights aren't there to be violated. This thread is a hypothetical remember; it's more about what kind of stance you'd take if you were in this situation, rather than how how likely it would be to happen.
But legally, it is viable. In a constitution free zone, the people don't have the right to assemble. In a state of emergency (which could by put into effect for any reason like a terrorist threat, war, or economic downfall) those rights are taken away also. So, I've got to press the fact that even though you haven't seen constitutional rights violated in CFZ's, there is no doubt that the government does not recognize them. They've been taken away. In this hypothetical, the peaceful protesters would not have constitutional rights, and legally, you could be viewed as disobeying a direct order with no just-cause. The reason for dispersing a peaceful crowd could be seemingly legit, like preventing a riot, or dispersing a mass that could become a target of terrorist attack.

[Aberrant]

Let me put it to you this way, we as military members have never been briefed on CFZ's but have been briefed that the constitution is in effect at all times and I have razed my right hand and swore to support and defend it. No where in my oath did I, or any other military member say, "except in certain areas". The constitution is the constitution and it governs every thing inside our borders and on the seas off our shores. Remember that military members have a vested interest in defending the constitution as it protects our rights as well.

[Mookster]

Let me put it to you this way, we as military members have never been briefed on CFZ's but have been briefed that the constitution is in effect at all times and I have razed my right hand and swore to support and defend it. No where in my oath did I, or any other military member say, "except in certain areas". The constitution is the constitution and it governs every thing inside our borders and on the seas off our shores. Remember that military members have a vested interest in defending the constitution as it protects our rights as well.

That was the sort of answer I'd hope to hear from all military men, but I think the influence of the military subculture would prevail, and most would just blindly accept the orders from a higher ranking official.

What's your opinion on the stripping of rights during marshal law and states of emergency?

[Aberrant]

Let me site Katrina and a saying that I have held true for a long time on this one. The saying is a person can be very intelligent, people as a whole are a bunch of morons. This especially true when the masses are in a high stress situation. Katrina was a great example of this. People start looting and committing every crime in the book in situations like that. Hell they were shooting at the people that were trying to help them. The only way to counter act those actions is to lock everything down to a point that it limits the criminals ability to act and keeps the honest person honest and safe. To the best of my knowledge, and if it was me, rights are only limited to the extent to keep the greater good safe.

Of course all of this makes sense in my head, just hope I communicated it effectively.

[PocketRevolution]

Two words: agent provocateur.

The Surete du Quebec were caught using them during the SPP protests a while back.