[–] [deleted] 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
2

[–] thelma 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Obviously meant nothing to stop stealing guns from citizens...so their theory and then there is reality.

0
2

[–] 13073171? 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Martial law is constitutional

0
1

[–] lanre 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

They do, but when rubber meets the road most will go with who's paying them vs who's shooting at them.

1
-1

[–] 13073048? 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

No. Soldiers do not take an oath to obey. Go learn something

1
3

[–] thelma 1 point 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

..I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

Say whaaat?

0
1

[–] 13073161? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I know reading is hard but words have meaning

, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

1
2

[–] uvulectomy 1 point 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

"...according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice."

The UCMJ requires military personnel to obey lawful orders. While there's little time to consider legal implications in the field, it has been ruled that if the order is clearly unlawful, and could be determined to be unlawful by the biggest idiot around, then there is both a duty and an obligation to disobey said order.

WRT to confiscating guns from civilians, that would be unconstitutional. And it has also been ruled that unconstitutional orders are in and of themselves unlawful, therefore the soldier can and should disobey.

Will they still get dragged into a court martial? Probably. But when it's argued that the order they disobeyed was unlawful, the heat then gets focused on the one who gave the order.