U.S. Soldiers now raiding U.S. gun shops

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • miguel

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Oct 24, 2008
    6,831
    113
    16T
    Ya know why they sent in the fly boys, right? 'Cause nothing will stop the U.S. Air Force!

    p.s. At least they didn't send B-52s...
     

    lashicoN

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 2, 2009
    2,130
    38
    North
    Soldiers = Army

    Airmen = Air Force

    yes, actually... I am. Ask any Marine, they will tell you they are Marines. Call one a soldier, he might bust you in the mouth.... call him a sailor and he'll bust up more than that...

    Soldier is a term describing a member of the US Army, Army Reserve and National Guard. I wore the uniform once, which is probably why I'm picky about it.

    So we fought against German civilians in WW2 and English Subjects invaded the Colonies? They couldn't have been soldiers because neither were a part of the "US Army, Army Reserve and National Guard." I'm not the dictator of terms, but to me, ground troops equals soldiers. Airmen = troops who are in the air. When an "airman" lands on the ground, picks up a rifle, and raids a store, he is no longer an "airman", since he no longer has anything to do with the air, he's a soldier, or ground troop. It doesn't matter to me if you came from a boat or a plane. I like organzied sections and defined terms, which is why I'm picky about this. If they dropped a bomb on the gun store, I'd be fine calling them "airmen." But they raided it, on the ground.

    Troops does equal the entire Military. Referring to a Marine as a Soldier is similar to calling a Paramedic a Fireman... :popcorn:

    And I asked in post #49 what did the Air Force do that was wrong or unlawful?!

    That's funny, I know someone who works for his fire department as a paramedic. :): I don't think he would be insulted if I called him either/or, because he is.

    I didn't respond the first time, because that isn't my fight here. My argument is about calling a spade a spade. I don't care if what they did was legal or not, seeing as how I believe their partners in this, ATF, FBI, are actually illegal to begin with, I wouldn't know where to start. My gripe is that some of you guys have a bias when it comes to the Feds, who pay the military, which employed several of you. When the Feds really do start busting gun stores, and not because military hardware was stolen, I want to be clear with everyone that I consider the (insert any Fed agency dressed as soldiers) to be soldiers. Soldiers implies a war is going on, which sane people aren't comfortable with, so they avoid that term to their own detriment. The Feds want our means of defense and at their first opportunity, they will grab for them.

    By the time that happens, I'd like the debate to be settled. The last thing we need during that time is a bunch of ex-military guys getting butt hurt about people like Rambone or myself "misusing" the term "soldier" or "troop".

    If you found something wrong with Rambone's research, or lack of research, then stick to that. I think it's wrong to call him an idiot (like Silverado did) because he called a soldier a soldier. I think it's false to say that he is part of the problem. Most INGOers hold Dan Coats in higher regard, and he directly voted to steal your freedom. That's where you guys lose me.

    Maybe the real problem with the country is that we have too many forums, and too much time on our hands, so we argue about what a soldier is instead of constantly screaming at our elected representatives about how stupid their decisions are.
     

    lashicoN

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 2, 2009
    2,130
    38
    North
    And I asked in post #49 what did the Air Force do that was wrong or unlawful?!

    Since I did go into this a bit in an earlier post and avoided it later, I'd like to have your opinion.

    To you, what is the United States Air Force's job? Why do they exist as a branch of our military? Is is to protect the skies or are they just another agency, among the many we already have, to help catch simple thieves and criminals? We have enough people to do that already. We had enough before the DHS, we had enough before the DEA, we had enough before the ATF, we had enough to satisfy most appetites with the creation of the FBI. I understand they were robbed and I understand a warrant was issued, by why is the Air Force in the business of catching American criminals, off base? Seriously, do you believe that should be in their job description? I like the Air Force. I want to continue to like the Air Force. I like them to be involved with America's force in the air.

    Next thing you know, NASA will be raiding grocery stores to help win the war on milk. :n00b:
     

    IndyBeerman

    Was a real life Beerman.....
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Jun 2, 2008
    7,700
    113
    Plainfield
    They were searching for stolen military hardware. So I don't have a problem with this single event.

    I agree....

    And once again we are Ramboned.

    Rambone can you for once in your life actually put a little bit of FACT in your statements. I mean heck in the first 6 seconds of the YouTube clip it states that the Airforce was searching for stolen MILITARY hardware.

    They are well within their right to do this and in no such way or form does Posse Comitatus fall under this.

    Military theft, Military investigation.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act
     

    gunowner930

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 25, 2010
    1,859
    38
    I'd never even heard of AFOSI prior to this thread. I can understand why they would want to assist the FBI and local law enforcement with an investigation regarding their stolen property, I still don't think they should be actively participating in raids on US citizens not in the Armed Forces.

    Lashicon- I agree with you on this expanding police state crap, but there are differences in each of the branches. Soldier does not equal Airman or Marine. I know, it's difficult to distinguish these days when the NATIONAL Guard is being deployed to Afghanistan and Iraq

    the Army and Marine Corps have different missions. The Army is land-based and the Marine Corps is sea-based, the Marines act as naval infantry on ships.

    A downed Airman that picks up a rifle and raids a building is likely just a "guy with a gun." I can't imagine the average Air Force pilot having much training with small arms.
     

    IndyBeerman

    Was a real life Beerman.....
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Jun 2, 2008
    7,700
    113
    Plainfield
    Not even remotely a good enough reason for them to leave base. This is a matter that should have been solely in the hands of the locals cops or the FBI. They had no business being involved in a law enforcement matter off their base. Doesn't matter if someone at that store had stolen the generals crown jewels. They broke the law.

    AFOSI

    Air Force Office of Special Investigations, sorta like Naval Criminal Investigative Services, they have aresting police powers that involve military related items.

    Guess what, stolen military hardware amazingly falls into that classification.

    So it should not have been solely in the hands of the local police or FBI, hell even the BATFE for that matter.
     

    eatsnopaste

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Dec 23, 2008
    1,469
    38
    South Bend

    lashicoN

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 2, 2009
    2,130
    38
    North
    Military theft, Military investigation.

    Is anyone here saying they shouldn't be allowed to investigate? :dunno:

    I had no idea the Air Force needed a local armored truck and SWAT team to conduct an "investigation". American citizens were worried the government was going to destroy their personal transportation due to the entrance of this "investigation".

    I've heard the line, "it was a gun store, they had to bring the big guns!" Does the ATF roll up in an armored truck and raid the store every time they peperform their annual audit? It is a gun store, after all, with ARMED PEOPLE. :runaway:

    Just because someone stole something from the military, does not mean they are ready to blast away Federal Agents and I don't understand why they always have to roll in with the big guns, kill the family dog, and scare the **** out of everyone because something was stolen or ingested.
     
    Last edited:

    gunowner930

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 25, 2010
    1,859
    38
    Is anyone here saying they shouldn't be allowed to investigate? :dunno:

    I had no idea the Air Force needed a local armored truck and SWAT team to conduct an "investigation". American citizens were worried the government was going to destroy their personal transportation due to the entrance of this "investigation".

    I've heard the line, "it was a gun store, they had to bring the big guns!" Does the ATF roll up in an armored truck and raid the store every time they peperform their annual audit? It is a gun store, after all, with ARMED PEOPLE. :runaway:

    uhh don't give them any ideas... Let's not forget the ATF is probably the most heavy-handed govt agency.

    Just because someone stole something from the military, does not mean they are ready to blast away Federal Agents and I don't understand why they always have to roll in with the big guns, kill the family dog, and scare the **** out of everyone because something was stolen or ingested.

    Me neither, I don't understand why cordon and knocks aren't employed more often. But if you do that, it lessens the fun of playing a tacticool war hero.

    Responses in red.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    It's only the beginning and yet another way to introduce the military into civilian law, what's left of it. The more we see it and hear about it, the more we will get used to it. Yeah right !

    In other words, Military Personnel have no jurisdiction acting against a US Citizen or US business, gun shop or not. Without doing some reading, the only time the military can act against a US Citizen (if ordered) is under Marshall Law.

    This smells, just like Fast & Furious. :poop:

    uhhhh...... false (or maybe you failed to clarify)
     

    Silverado

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jul 5, 2011
    133
    16
    Should there be a military trial too?

    If the thieves are members of the military, and thus subject to the UCMJ, then yes, absolutely. If not, they should be charged under applicable state or federal statutes just like any other civilian.

    If anyone is interested in the legal basis for the participation of CIVILIAN federal agents (ie: Air Force OIS) in criminal investigations, here is a memorandum regarding Posse Comitatus and military involvement and cooperation with civilian criminal investigations, with law citations:

    EFFECT OF POSSE COMITATUS ACT ON PROPOSED DETAIL OF CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE TO THE NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION CENTER

    For those who think that everything the government does is illegal, and that no one in the world has any authority over anyone else whatsoever, don't bother wasting my time or yours.
     

    jeremy

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    Feb 18, 2008
    16,482
    36
    Fiddler's Green
    Is anyone here saying they shouldn't be allowed to investigate? :dunno:

    I had no idea the Air Force needed a local armored truck and SWAT team to conduct an "investigation". American citizens were worried the government was going to destroy their personal transportation due to the entrance of this "investigation".

    I've heard the line, "it was a gun store, they had to bring the big guns!" Does the ATF roll up in an armored truck and raid the store every time they peperform their annual audit? It is a gun store, after all, with ARMED PEOPLE. :runaway:

    Just because someone stole something from the military, does not mean they are ready to blast away Federal Agents and I don't understand why they always have to roll in with the big guns, kill the family dog, and scare the **** out of everyone because something was stolen or ingested.

    I would hazard a guess that the Armored Car was there due to LVPD Protocol and not a Request by the AFOSI. As soon as an Investigation leads to a source such we are seeing here it is pretty Common to notify the applicable Local Agencies of what is found in their Local. Generally, they (Local LEO) then invite more Agencies to the game...
     

    HICKMAN

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    22   0   0
    Jan 10, 2009
    16,762
    48
    Lawrence Co.
    So we fought against German civilians in WW2 and English Subjects invaded the Colonies? They couldn't have been soldiers because neither were a part of the "US Army, Army Reserve and National Guard."

    now you're being a smart-ass just to be one. I merely pointed out airmen and marines are not soldiers, just as soldiers are not airmen, sailors or marines.

    My gripe is that some of you guys have a bias when it comes to the Feds, who pay the military, which employed several of you.

    Maybe you can explain that to the DHS director, so she will take us off her enemy #1 watch list....

    By the time that happens, I'd like the debate to be settled. The last thing we need during that time is a bunch of ex-military guys getting butt hurt about people like Rambone or myself "misusing" the term "soldier" or "troop".

    ah yes... ye olde "butt hurt" line, classic. Problem is, not all of us are "ex"-military, many here are still serving.


    If you found something wrong with Rambone's research, or lack of research, then stick to that.

    I did, see:

    Soldiers = Army

    Airmen = Air Force

    He's the one who titled the thread "U.S. Soldiers now raiding U.S. gun shops"

    I merely pointed out that they did not...

    Most INGOers hold Dan Coats in higher regard, and he directly voted to steal your freedom.

    no... we don't. There are a couple of supporters... but apparently you were not following these forums when he was elected.


    Maybe the real problem with the country is that we have too many forums, and too much time on our hands, so we argue about what a soldier is instead of constantly screaming at our elected representatives about how stupid their decisions are.

    very well may be... we also have a lot of tin foil being sold. No point in screaming at our elected representatives... scream at people you know to go vote instead of sitting home. Less than a 3rd of our population decides the future of our country.

    Lumping our military in with the ATF and DHS is just moronic. Tin hats will never get anywhere if they think bashing "ex-military" guys is a good idea.

    Why you think we're all stormtroopers to the emporer I just don't understand...
     
    Last edited:
    Top Bottom