Other State Virginia National Guard responds after Democratic lawmaker suggests it may be needed to enforce gun control measures

[CountryGent]

Interesting: Virginia National Guard responds after Democratic lawmaker suggests it may be needed to enforce gun control measures.

Read More

 

[Red98422]

I'm going to be honest I might now be smart enough to know what that means....it seems that while yes they responded l, it was a nonesense response that at least IMO didn't actually address or answer any of those folks questions.

They state "they will not speculate" however it doesn't say which side they're "not speculating" on.

 

[3MTA3]

Anything short of "Not no but EFF NO!!!. In no way shape or form will I turn armed soldiers against US Citizens." is unacceptable.

The non response tells me that the General is a political type who lacks the courage to do the right thing. I hope that the soldiers they ask to do the dirty work will refuse to comply.

 

[Xaevian]

@CountryGent, their response is a nonresponse, and is appropriate. Since it hasn't happened yet, and no order has been given, the command won't guess at what might happen. Coups and military go hand in hand, and they (the guard)must tread very lightly to not provoke either side or risk alarming the feds as well.

 

[Xaevian]

Since everyone loves polls:

92% of Americans think their basic rights are being threatened, new poll shows

Americans are most concerned that their freedom of speech, right to bear arms and right to equal justice are at risk, the poll finds.

www.usatoday.com

 

[gmerkt]

Interesting is the word for it. Hare-brained is another word. One wonders, are these comments by the proponents sincere or are they just stirring up trouble to see what fallout occurs.

Barriers exist to actually carrying out such a thing. Just to get terms straight, it was stated the governor could "nationalize" the Guard. If they are talking about calling them to federal active duty, only the president of the US can do that. Yes, the governor could place them on state active duty (Title 44, VA Code). But then, what does aiding in law enforcement mean in this context? If they mean enforcement of state laws on the books, that could mean waiting until a conviction was handed down, then rolling out to do whatever it took to enforce it. Which would require them to spend most of their time sitting around like some kind of barracks police in East Germany, waiting for trouble.

Or would it be a situation where Guard personnel were parceled out to various county sheriff's offices and police departments to sit around and wait for violation complaints to come in?

Or do they have in mind going around counties, breaking down doors? That doesn't go over well.

It's one thing to talk about such an activation, it's another to get it done under such controversial circumstances. Which includes how to pay for it, as all those Guardsmen taken away from their civilian jobs have to be paid by the state while they are on state AD. Not to mention logistical issues for state AD that federal funds may not be used for. Oh, and in Virginia (like many states), Guardsmen on state AD get the same pay and ALLOWANCES as they would on federal active duty. I capitalize allowances because this means the housing allowance which is the second largest element in US military compensation.

My opinion, it's a pretty inflammatory act to even toss this idea out into the public arena.

It's a fact that many politicians don't know anything about the National Guard.

 

[Xaevian]

Emboldened is the word, and these activist, empty-gesture politicians are giddily skipping through a minefield, high on their own poorly placed overzealousness, heads stuffed so deeply into their own backsides they can carve their initials into next weeks turd.

Rolls off the fingers like angry poetry...

 

[USMC-03]

@CountryGent, their response is a nonresponse, and is appropriate. Since it hasn't happened yet, and no order has been given, the command won't guess at what might happen. Coups and military go hand in hand, and they (the guard)must tread very lightly to not provoke either side or risk alarming the feds as well.

Is this a political punt? Absolutely.

The CG isn't going to step on an obvious land mine; at least not when there's no compelling reason. And that's fair enough.

But... Just issuing the statement at this early juncture is significant. The command knows a firestorm is coming if the political class oversteps.

 

[Xaevian]

It's not a punt at all, but a check move. It was very clear that the VA National Guard Command will not commit to a course of action until all the cards are on the table. It is a clear message that they are staying out of the decision game, not backing anyone, no provocation.

Firestorm is right on the money, though. Its an effing powder keg, and no part time general wants to be written into the history books as the guy who started Kent State part II, or worse.

I'm on the edge of my seat...


Not really, this will all be forgotten in a couple of weeks.

 

[Brownsalamander]

I don't think the VA Nasty Girls, the AG or the Governer are taking into account the number of "passionate" 2A veterans with extensive combat experience, that are more than willing to reverse-engineer the guerrilla tactics used against them in the Iraq/Afghan war to ensure their guns stay right where they are.

I hope the tension forces them to rethink their stance on guns, and decide how important it really is to them.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

If this were to come to pass...it may be turning point in our history.
I say may , because , we as gun owners and dare I say Americans , really ain't united...
And to have a counter movement a united front is needed...Else all the little splintering groups will fizzle out or be hunted down.
Andy
Edit for spelling...thanks @No_Regerts ....

 

[No_Regerts]

And to have a counter movement a untied front is needed...

Lysdexics are teople poo, you know.

 

[WoodsPlinker]

Well, legally they are limited to the local national guard, federal is not allowed.

That's not a lot of people... And how many of them will just "follow orders".

You know you are on the wrong side of history when a proposed new law includes possibly needing to muster the national guard to enforce it.

 

[Stomper]

It's a fact that many politicians don't know anything about the National Guard.

Actually, it's a demonstrable fact that MOST politicians don't know sheite about ANYTHING... useful.

 

[Brownsalamander]

There are too

If this were to come to pass...it may be turning point in our history.
I say may , because , we as gun owners and dare I say Americans , really ain't united...
And to have a counter movement a untied front is needed...Else all the little splintering groups will fizzle out or be hunted down.
Andy

you've got too many gun owners that voice a willingness to compromise, of any kind. Even saying so much as "sure, I'm all for new laws that keep guns out of criminals hands".... means youre with the left. Regardless of how rational they may think it is...they are miss the point.... if you give an inch, they will take a mile.

 

[nwslopoke]

People look at the National Guard like every unit is a crack squadron of Green Berets. The guard is made up of everything from the fighting cooks, admins with attitudes to actual Billy Badazzes. However, the Guard in my opinion was never designed to be an occupying force on it's own. The rank and file in the guard will likely come from the people against this tyrannical idea and will not show up to fight themselves.

Worst case scenario the Guard got activate how many people show up? 15-20%. Of those how many actual meat eaters willing to get after it? Even my dog knows not to pee where she eats. These dangerous games have consequences.

 

[P7M13]

Lysdexics are teople poo, you know.

As a dyslexic, I read that sentence as "lexidyxics are people too, you know."
Untied fronts tend to be more effective than tied ones.
When I read McEachin's quote, I think about all the state statutes I read helping my ex through law school. They were replete with idiocy, and it seems McEachin is of the same ilk.

 

[gmerkt]

People look at the National Guard like every unit is a crack squadron of Green Berets. The guard is made up of everything from the fighting cooks, admins with attitudes to actual Billy Badazzes. However, the Guard in my opinion was never designed to be an occupying force on it's own. The rank and file in the guard will likely come from the people against this tyrannical idea and will not show up to fight themselves.

In general, the Guard is more formidable than it used to be due to the routine federal activations many of its members have been called up for in recent times. Right now about half of Guardsmen have combat experience.

I agree there is a downside in calling Guardsmen up to act as suppressors in local communities. But smart leaders would move forces around so they were deployed in communities other than their own. Like police and the military were deployed in East Germany. You want brutes in Berlin, you get them from Saxony.

You know you are on the wrong side of history when a proposed new law includes possibly needing to muster the national guard to enforce it.

I think this is more than likely. It's a radical concept that might cause old-timey Dems and other conventional thinkers to urge caution on the governor. As a possible comparison, can you envision calling up the Guard to close down or protect abortion clinics??

 

[Grumpa]

Anything short of "Not no but EFF NO!!!. In no way shape or form will I turn armed soldiers against US Citizens." is unacceptable.

The non response tells me that the General is a political type who lacks the courage to do the right thing. I hope that the soldiers they ask to do the dirty work will refuse to comply.

If they want to keep breathing they will. Simple math tells us everything we and the Guard need to know about how this pans out. I wouldn't be worried if I was in VA.. However, that being said, keep your powder dry boys!

 

[nwslopoke]

In general, the Guard is more formidable than it used to be due to the routine federal activations many of its members have been called up for in recent times. Right now about half of Guardsmen have combat experience.

My point is guard units like all units have a specialty. It might be a combat unit, but it also could be a communications unit or air wing. Not all would have specific fighting capabilities or even remember the dangerous end of an M4.

My Air National Guard unit was called up during the LA riots. My friends helicopter unit was activated during Katrina. Neither example were particularly versed in crowd control or policing actions. Had either faced a motivated militia on their own who knows. Probably too much chest thumping and hot heads not yielding to authority to back down on either side.